# Worn out scenes



## Bloodstone Press (Jan 18, 2005)

So I was watching Minority Report recently. It was pretty good, BTW. However, there was a scene in it that made me roll my eyes. It also reminded me of a scene in Troy, which I haven't even seen. I have read the first half of the script for Troy and I know there is a scene in the beginning of that movie that makes my eyes roll, too. 

 So what are they? 
1. In minority report (and dozens of other action movies, most notably in my mind is the Dirty Harry movies)  there is a running fight/chase sequence where the "high action" of the chase is interspersed with SILLY situational comedy. The chase often takes the main characters across roof tops until the fall/jump through a skylight/window and interrupt some random people doing something silly. From here the chase usually runs next door, or downstairs to another equally random and silly group of people who do NOT react to the situation in the way real people would. 
For example, when the cops chasing Tom Cruise fly into the apartment the woman can be heard saying "get out! what re you doing? are you crazy?" Stuff like that.  
Now if cops, chasing a criminal, suddenly burst through your living room window right now, what would you say and do? 

2. In Troy there is a scene where Brad is sleeping. He's supposed to be with the army. But he's stayed behind and slept in. So they send a messenger to get him. The messenger sneaks into his tent, but Brad... er. Achilles... is such a great and keen warrior that he is already awake and feigning sleep. He is already aware of the intruder, and suddenly, without warning, his hand strikes out and catches the intruder in his vice like grip!! (cue dramatic music) 

Yawn..

 How many movies have I seen that scene in? God, save me from lame, hackneyed movie scenes. 

 I want to see a scene that depicts a great warrior’s experience by showing his exaggerated startle response when someone sneaks up on him. Exaggerated Startle Response is a symptom of PTSD and is a common reaction among people that have experienced combat and excessive physical violence. Lets see brad shout in alarm, spring from the bed in a flash, rip the kids arm off, and beat him with it before he even realizes what he's done. 

 Anyway, are there any hackneyed movie scenes that you've seen way too many times in way too many movies?

 I'm not really trying to be negative here, just trying to find out what people are tired of seeing. Minority Report was a great movie, even with the lame chase scene.


----------



## Thanee (Jan 18, 2005)

You mean like Hollywood movies with a non-happy ending? 

 Bye
 Thanee


----------



## Umbran (Jan 18, 2005)

Bloodstone Press said:
			
		

> Now if cops, chasing a criminal, suddenly burst through your living room window right now, what would you say and do?




If people suddenly burst through your living room window right now, are you sure you'd recognize them as police before you reacted?



> I want to see a scene that depicts a great warrior’s experience by showing his exaggerated startle response when someone sneaks up on him. Exaggerated Startle Response is a symptom of PTSD and is a common reaction among people that have experienced combat and excessive physical violence.




Been done - in _X-Men_.  Wolverine wakes up startled and runs Rogue through before he realizes what's actually going on.    



> Anyway, are there any hackneyed movie scenes that you've seen way too many times in way too many movies?




Sometimes, I wish.  I tend to throttle my disbelief into unconsciousness when I walk into a movie, so that I don't pay as much attention to the film on a meta-level.  It often makes me into what others might call a less than discerning critic.


----------



## Tetsubo (Jan 18, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> If people suddenly burst through your living room window right now, are you sure you'd recognize them as police before you reacted?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




This is one of the things that drives my friends nuts, I can not turn off my disbelief. It's on 11 all the time when I watch a film. I notice every little flaw and it can really spoil a movie for me. I love when I can get "lost" in a movie. But it is a rare thing...

The most tired scene idea for me is that every bloody character in the movie knows the main character... it's like they are the most popular human in the world...


----------



## kyloss (Jan 18, 2005)

Personaly for me the scene that I am tired of in action movies is where the hero(s) spend the whole movie killing there way through his henchment left and right without a second thought but when they get to the BBEG they do the If I kill you I'll be just like you thing. If your gona have a problem killing the truely evil guy shouldnt you have a problem killing simple lackeys?


----------



## Henry (Jan 18, 2005)

My personal pet peeve is the "I've just hit the villain in the genitals, and I've got him rolling on the ground in pain, so NOW I'm going to run away from him."  That one ticks me off, because if someone's stalking me, and I've just sucker-punched him, I'm going to press the advantage and keep stabbing / eye-gouging / strangling the  until he's DEAD! It's not called "FIGHT or flight" for nothing!


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 18, 2005)

I agree with Henry. That's been bothering me in a number of movies lately.

My most abused scene would be the "OH, MY GOD! THE MONSTER ISN'T DEAD!!!, that seemingly HAS to be included in every horror movie since "Carrie". Setting things up for a sequel is one thing. Trying to shock audiences with something that is in every movie is just feeble and tired.


----------



## F5 (Jan 18, 2005)

In all fairness to Minority Report, it was supposed to represent a future where people are much more de-sensitized to seemingly-arbitrary police actions like that.  They weren't saying "this is how people really would react", but rather "this is how people might react, given the world they live in".

That having been said, yeah.  The hero-falling-through-floor/wall/window-and-landing-in bathroom-while-neigbor-is-in-the-tub scene needs to be put out to pasture.

How about the "ending the movie by having a character sarcastically repeat a line that was used on them earlier in the movie" scene?


----------



## Wereserpent (Jan 19, 2005)

Or one of the characters standing over a dead friend/spouse/siblings, dropping to their knees and saying "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"


----------



## Starman (Jan 19, 2005)

Galeros said:
			
		

> Or one of the characters standing over a dead friend/spouse/siblings, dropping to their knees and saying "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"




Rather they should say something like "FIIIIINNNNNNAAAAALLLLY!!"

Starman


----------



## Thanee (Jan 19, 2005)

Similar to Henry's, what also is pretty dumb oftentimes, if the scarcely armed heroes defeat some villains and then do not take their weapons with them.

 Don't they know!? Kill monsters _and_ take their stuff! D'oh!

 Bye
 Thanee


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jan 19, 2005)

The one that ticks me off: _You are driving down a road, there before you, a car is in the ditch (wreaked), a person is in the middle of the street..._

Nothing good ever comes from this, it is standard setup stuff and may work in a D&D game but come on!


----------



## nothing to see here (Jan 19, 2005)

I hate...really hate...the staple of summer blockbusters where one of the protagonists has a dog...the dog seems about to get killed, and always...ALWAYS, miraculously survives.

The most predictable hero to survive any action movie is the dog...always the dog.

Outside of Aliens 3, I can't remember a movie which included a scene featuring needless dog-death, and let's face, Aliens 3 sucked.

That's why I found funniest part of 'Anchorman' was Jack Black punting the dog off the bridge (of course the dog survived, but it was a comedy, so that's okay)

I understand the awesome power of PETA in petitioning against movies that reveal cruelty to animals (and I certainly oppose actually endangering the animal 'actors' involved in film making).  And I recognize that, in a sad commentary on society, test audiences continually react with horror at animal death, yet are completely hum-dum about human-death...but that does not change the hackneyed...predictable...'Sparky gets away' pushover mentality of mass market film-makers to always ensuring that...in movies filled with senseless human death "no animals (real or fictional) were harmed in the making of this movie"


----------



## Tetsubo (Jan 19, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> My personal pet peeve is the "I've just hit the villain in the genitals, and I've got him rolling on the ground in pain, so NOW I'm going to run away from him."  That one ticks me off, because if someone's stalking me, and I've just sucker-punched him, I'm going to press the advantage and keep stabbing / eye-gouging / strangling the  until he's DEAD! It's not called "FIGHT or flight" for nothing!




Right. If the baddy has attacked me or mine and I have him down, I'm not stopping until I see grey matter.


----------



## Mercule (Jan 19, 2005)

Hero gets snot kicked out of him.  Hero gets more snot kicked out of him.  BBEG has hero exactly where he wants him.  Hero miraculously gets his second wind and defeats BBEG.

Ditto for "And, now, watch me kill your child/significant other/chia-pet. -- OH NO!  Now I've really pissed you off."

Either could be okay in the right context, but have become cliched.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jan 19, 2005)

nothing to see here said:
			
		

> I hate...really hate...the staple of summer blockbusters where one of the protagonists has a dog...the dog seems about to get killed, and always...ALWAYS, miraculously survives.
> 
> The most predictable hero to survive any action movie is the dog...always the dog.
> 
> ...




I once heard that there are rules for the rating for movies, example: PG would never show a bystander die, so this meant they would have to film a scene showing the bystander okay, climbing from the wreakage or running away.  This could explain it, target demographic.


----------



## Particle_Man (Jan 19, 2005)

nothing to see here said:
			
		

> I hate...really hate...the staple of summer blockbusters where one of the protagonists has a dog...the dog seems about to get killed, and always...ALWAYS, miraculously survives.




Spoiler:  One movie that really does kill the cute dog very dead is 



Spoiler



Mars Attacks!


 although that was likely a parody of the surviving dog in 



Spoiler



Independance Day


.


----------



## David Howery (Jan 19, 2005)

well, if you guys are just itching to see a bunch of dogs get wasted, rent "A Fish Called Wanda".  Three little yappy lap dogs get offed in three really awful (but sorta funny) ways... come to think of it, an aquarium full of fish does too....


----------



## Pielorinho (Jan 19, 2005)

Another dead-dog scene:  _Ladykillers_.  That one even has a snide in-joke about the "****ing humane society rep on set" who must at all costs be kept from learning of the death.  (For what it's worth, the American Humane Association gave the movie its highest rating on animal welfare issues, and its report on the movie seemed pretty amused by the joke at their expense).

Cliches I hate?  The freakin' love interest.  It's all good if it arises naturally from the story you're telling, but don't just add one in for no reason, and really don't add a helpless beautiful woman in just so the strong man can save her and get smoochies.

Daniel


----------



## Villano (Jan 19, 2005)

People outrunning a fireball.  I swear that every action movie made since 1980 includes this scene.

Candles in a love scene.  Sometimes it can be downright silly.  I remember watching a movie in which a man and woman were on the run and hiding out in a sleazy motel.  There's a love scene and suddenly the room was filled with candles.  And not just any candles.  They were all white candles.  Where the hell did they come from?  Do sleazy motels stock up on romantic candles or something?

Instant death from wounds that shouldn't kill.  How many times have you seen a dead body in a movie or on TV and the only injury looks to be some slashes across the face?  It shows up a lot in horror films.

The other big one is someone being killed instantly by being stabbed in the stomach.  Usually, this happens when the villain is about to strike the fatal blow and lifts his weapon in the air, and then the hero stabs him (see Gowron's death on DS9).   This is especially annoying when you can see that the hero's blade has only gone in about a quarter inch.

Zomibe movies in which you have to shoot them in the head.  Stop ripping off George Romero!  Also, in these movies, there are two types of people:  those that keep shooting the zombies in the body even though they know better, and those that can hit a running zombie in the head at 400 yards.

The sheriff was in on it all along.  Do I need to say more?

"Heroes" who aren't held accountable.  Now, I'm not talking about vigillante movies like Deathwish and The Punisher here.  I'm talking about the cop, soldier, or whatever who "doesn't play by the rules".  Look at the remake of Planet Of The Apes.  Marky Mark disobeys orders and pretty much gets everyone killed.  Why is he the hero?

I remember a review of, I think, The Lost World, in which the "morally righteous" heroes try to protect the dinosaurs and get a bunch of people killed.  

There are a million more, but I'm tired of typing.


----------



## barsoomcore (Jan 20, 2005)

Mercule said:
			
		

> Hero gets snot kicked out of him.  Hero gets more snot kicked out of him.  BBEG has hero exactly where he wants him.  Hero miraculously gets his second wind and defeats BBEG.
> 
> (snip)
> 
> Either could be okay in the right context, but have become cliched.



"The right context", for example, including any and all Jackie Chan movies.

And I'll chime in on the "Oh, he must be dead since he fell over. I'll just walk over and poke him with my finger." Come on! I actually CHEER when I see somebody just keep on shooting, then walk up and shoot them a few times while they're lying on the ground.

Oh, and why is that movies promise no animals were harmed in the making of this motion picture, when we all know that dozens of cows pigs and assorted marine life were KILLED so that people could EAT them? I want my movies to say, 

_No animals were harmed in the making of this motion picture, except for the ones we KILLED so we could EAT them. And they were tasty. Jason's barbecue sauce is to DIE for._

I mean, why are animal actors so much more important than cows or chickens or whatever?


----------



## mojo1701 (Jan 20, 2005)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> I mean, why are animal actors so much more important than cows or chickens or whatever?




Because they're cute and have a good agent.


----------



## s/LaSH (Jan 20, 2005)

I remember hearing that animals have more rights in some areas (legal/geographic) than people, especially in places like California. Strange.

Anything suspenseful is going to have a box of kittens or something as the culmination for at least one 'dun dun dun dun daahh' scene. The 'fake-out'. And inversely, anything pretty is deadly. The cuter or sexier the subject, the greater the odds that it eats the marrow of your bones.


----------



## Elrik_DarkFury (Jan 20, 2005)

The scene where the main hero knows that pretty much everyone in the house got killed by the serrial-killer 5 minutes ago but still goes to the cellar to search (for whom or for what?!) 
a)without calling the police 
b)with nothing more than a spoon or a fork to defend themself
C)and they keep forgeting to open the damn lights of the cellar and they have to walk in the darkness -to make the thing scarier i suppose...
All this is,is so damn silly.

And I hate movies with animals.
a)The football playing dog who helps the team win the finals
b)The hockey-champion monkey
c)The genius pet that beats the two burglars' asses 
d)The one that saves the world or ..


_________________
The Wizard


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jan 20, 2005)

Elrik_DarkFury said:
			
		

> And I hate movies with animals.
> a)The football playing dog who helps the team win the finals
> b)The hockey-champion monkey
> c)The genius pet that beats the two burglars' asses
> ...




  May I add an e) Dogs that do Karate?


----------



## Berandor (Jan 20, 2005)

Karate dogs. Wow.

Though I'll echo the random love interest. Men and women can't be friends, at least not in Hollywood. There's a good-looking woman - she'll fall in love with the hero. With heroines, there are so little of them that the scene hasn't had a chance to get worn out.

The surviving pet (dog) is also old, as well as the surviving comic relief character.

But, honestly, nowadays there are so many cliché situations you can tell a movie just by watching five minutes. "The police officer will betray them", "They will fall in love", "The machines will have won and then inexplicably stop", "the cold-faced killer will hesitate before killing the love interest so the hero can save her", ...

The problem is, most of these scenes are used because they worked before. There is no believable development leading up to them. Like Pielorinho said, having people fall in love is not the problem, it's when they fall in love only because it's in the script. The same with the rest of these scenes.

But perhaps that's one more reason why I'm bored with most of today's cinema.


----------



## WizarDru (Jan 20, 2005)

FWIW, in Troy, the scene isn't played exactly as you read it, iirc.  A solider is sent to get Achilles, all right, but he's not sleeping: he's coming off of a bender.  He's deadly, but he's clumsy and clearly hung-over from a night of wine and wenching.  He's basically 'phoning it in' for the King...a 9 to 5 salaryman warrior. 

 Personal pet peeve: Any time someone uses wildly different data sources and magically combines them, almost instantly, to get some plot-necessary result.  _"Wait, what if you compare all the suspects who are left-handed against the DMV's records of Mazda owners in the greater NYC area?"  _Just once, I'd like someone to say: _"Well, I can export those to some SQL databases and try and find a match, but I'll need to write a custom query application and then test it...that'll take about eight hours, sir."_

 Favorite really bad fake tech line comes from Lois and Clark, a few years back.  When something goes wrong with "the database", the villain tells his tech assistant to stop it.  Her reply?  "*I can't!  It's collapsing into a sub-directory!!*"  Makes me giggle, even now.


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jan 20, 2005)

Berandor said:
			
		

> The surviving pet (dog) is also old, as well as the surviving comic relief character.




 I liked how the comic relief sidekick "survived" in _Shaun of the Dead_.


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jan 20, 2005)

WizarDru said:
			
		

> Personal pet peeve: Any time someone uses wildly different data sources and magically combines them, almost instantly, to get some plot-necessary result. _"Wait, what if you compare all the suspects who are left-handed against the DMV's records of Mazda owners in the greater NYC area?" _Just once, I'd like someone to say: _"Well, I can export those to some SQL databases and try and find a match, but I'll need to write a custom query application and then test it...that'll take about eight hours, sir."_




 LOL that is one of mine as well. I also hate how fake and overly-graphical the operating systems are in most movies. I understand they don't feel like shelling out to show their movie characters using Win 2k, but at least make them look a little more authentic than a colorful background with 4 animated, 3-d icons. 



			
				WizarDru said:
			
		

> Favorite really bad fake tech line comes from Lois and Clark, a few years back. When something goes wrong with "the database", the villain tells his tech assistant to stop it. Her reply? "*I can't!  It's collapsing into a sub-directory!!*"  Makes me giggle, even now.




  *snicker* at least Star Trek put some effort into their techno-babble.


----------



## Mystery Man (Jan 20, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> Sometimes, I wish. I tend to throttle my disbelief into unconsciousness when I walk into a movie, so that I don't pay as much attention to the film on a meta-level. It often makes me into what others might call a less than discerning critic.




 My father in law (retired air force, used to fly B-52's) does this _constantly_. Don't get him started on the alien space ship in close encounters.


----------



## KnowTheToe (Jan 20, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> My personal pet peeve is the "I've just hit the villain in the genitals, and I've got him rolling on the ground in pain, so NOW I'm going to run away from him."  That one ticks me off, because if someone's stalking me, and I've just sucker-punched him, I'm going to press the advantage and keep stabbing / eye-gouging / strangling the  until he's DEAD! It's not called "FIGHT or flight" for nothing!





Running is exactly what you should do in these instances.  If you have ever fought  an adult male who is significantly larger than you, or watched an episode of cops or the like, then you have witnessed how much abuse the human body can take and keep going.  Sure getting kicked in the nads hurts, but with all the adrenaline surging through the body you can ignore much of it and keep on trucking.  Best bet is to run like hell screaming after you get any advantage.  I witnessed a drunk man in such a rush to meet a guy in the parking lot for a fight, run right through a plate glass door.  It hardly slowed hime down.

It is also more emotionally difficult to inflict pain on someone that you may think.  We all like to think we have it in us but, when push comes to shove many people would struggle over being able to kill or maime someone.  Subconsciously you may start pulling your punches and then you could be in trouble again.  


What annoys me is that they always fall, trip, car does not start or on the other hand if there is a parade that they can get lost in.


----------



## WizarDru (Jan 20, 2005)

KnowTheToe said:
			
		

> What annoys me is that they always fall, trip, car does not start or on the other hand if there is a parade that they can get lost in.




 Oh man, that's two I forgot.

 1) The car that never starts properly.  Any time there's any sort of desperate escape necessary, the car always has to badly malfunction and refuse to turn over.  YAWN.  It's irritating, just like the time bomb always being stopped at the last few seconds.  I know it's meant to build tension, but it FAILS.  It's lazy shorthand, usually.

 2) Explodium, the cheap substitute for metal used in most motor vehicles in movies.  Gas tanks explode...we get it.  But in many movies, it just seems ridiculous how many cars, trucks, helicopters, boats and what have you manage to turn into roaring fonts of explosive fire.  I mean, I love a good explosion as much as the next guy, but if you overuse it, it loses the effect, guys.


----------



## Mad Mac (Jan 20, 2005)

I can't believe no one has mentioned this one--hanging from the ledge, but someone catches them at the last moment, and for some reason, there's some conflict about whether or not the person will be pulled up. Am I supposed to believe that people are always falling off ledges, except someone who is morally conflicted about them is always nearby and is going to catch them in the split second they have to react?

 A less used cliche, but funny, is "Hacker" scenes, where some purported uber-hacker hacks into a well protected system in 15 seconds by launching their "Super Hack 9000" program with the click of the button. Usually, this program is represented by cute, cartoony graphical effects that show what progress they are making, and the Hacker occassionally mutters gibberish to sound like they're doing something when they are obviously just sitting there staring at the screen like everyone else.


----------



## mojo1701 (Jan 20, 2005)

KnowTheToe said:
			
		

> there is a parade that they can get lost in.




Especially if it's a St. Patrick's day parade during the autumn (in the northern hemisphere).


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 20, 2005)

WizarDru said:
			
		

> Oh man, that's two I forgot.
> 
> 1) The car that never starts properly.  Any time there's any sort of desperate escape necessary, the car always has to badly malfunction and refuse to turn over.  YAWN.  It's irritating, just like the time bomb always being stopped at the last few seconds.  I know it's meant to build tension, but it FAILS.  It's lazy shorthand, usually.




This is actually the third law of Hollywood and it covers far more than just cars. It applies to anything that is needed to start IMMEDIATELY, spaceship, warpdrive, atomic powerplant etc...


----------



## Thotas (Jan 20, 2005)

Here's mine: the Obligatory Captive Escape Attempt.  It seems that if you have anyone detained by anyone else (other than sometimes the police or such), and there is some hero-type coming to rescue them, it is not permissable to have that person sit tight with help on the way.  Either the captive will escape, and just as they're about to leave the site of their captivity find the hero and become co-hero, or they will be foiled by bad luck at the last moment ... but the scene is still required.  Because either of these scenes prevents the captive from being a victim, you see, and in Political Correctness Land we have to make sure that every one is always shown to be empowered.  Because if one individual is shown as being unable to escape when shackled, sedated and kept behind titanium bars, it would indicate that everyone who fits any demographic category that person belongs to is lesser than those who don't fit the demographic.  The requirement of this scene is predictable, boring, and adds 10 minutes to a movie that was probably too long already.


----------



## Chaldfont (Jan 20, 2005)

Darth Shoju said:
			
		

> LOL that is one of mine as well. I also hate how fake and overly-graphical the operating systems are in most movies. I understand they don't feel like shelling out to show their movie characters using Win 2k, but at least make them look a little more authentic than a colorful background with 4 animated, 3-d icons.




Hehehe, me too. I call these "movie GUI's". Its like, "Ok, we have 90 days to get this software project working. Ed, You've got 80 days to work on the GUI and a team of 20 graphical artists. Jeff, you get the last 10 days to make the thing actually work."

My votes:

The cat that jumps out and scares the daylights out of everyone during a suspenseful, usually monster-tracking moment.

The town drunk that watches the car chase go buy and then looks at his bottle of liquor as if he's thinking, "I really oughta quit drinking!". How many Blake Edwards and James Bond movies does this happen in?

Action movies where the good guy and bad guy are blazing away at each other when their guns run out of ammo at exactly the same time. Ok, wait. I actually kind of like that one.

Vorpal, wounding swords/axes in all movies featuring midieval battles. I hold Braveheart responsible for this one.

The classic date movie cliche: one person discovers that he/she has been decieved the whole time by the other who has just now realized how much she/he loves the decieved and she/he's really sorry and they break up for about five minutes of screen time until True Love Conquers All.

Any action movie where one of the heroes is due to retire but has to do one last case/mission/score/whatever.

Hot, extremely competent and athletic action heroines. Actually I REALLY like this one.

I really think that somewhere in LA, there is a circa 1990's PC running a simple program that just juxtaposes all the cliches in this thread and vomits up the next megaplex fodder.


----------



## kolvar (Jan 20, 2005)

Actually, there is a nother dog, that dies: Hootch in Scot and Hootch, but there is still a happy end, sniff (which is anoying).

My peeves: 
- Clever Riddles, that can only be solved if you know the answer (this movie about the Templar Treasure. Wish, I could do a suspensefull adventure like that with players, but I have never played with such a group ... and the preparations would take for ever).
- missed shooting practise, i.e. of everyone but the hero and the main-villain.
- Charakters destined to die: the nice ones, the hero relies on. It just takes out the suspense. One look and: Oh, he/she is going to die, lets bet when.
- Movie-GUIs are dreadful (especially in movies, that pretend to be about computers  or hackers).
- on the same line: giving historical explanations in the movie (and to the audience) and getting them realy wrong.


----------



## Mercule (Jan 20, 2005)

WizarDru said:
			
		

> Just once, I'd like someone to say: _"Well, I can export those to some SQL databases and try and find a match, but I'll need to write a custom query application and then test it...that'll take about eight hours, sir."_




This one used to really bother me.  Then I realized that no one wants to watch some hacker spend eight hours working on something while the rest of the cast twiddles their thumbs.  So long as it's used as time-compression, and not as the timely solution to a suspenseful scene, I'm okay with it.

Depending on exactly what they do with a fake GUI -- like GUI up something that'd be all text, normally -- I might be fine with that, too.  That's something that's rarely executed well, though.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jan 21, 2005)

Darth Shoju said:
			
		

> LOL that is one of mine as well. I also hate how fake and overly-graphical the operating systems are in most movies. I understand they don't feel like shelling out to show their movie characters using Win 2k, but at least make them look a little more authentic than a colorful background with 4 animated, 3-d icons.




It's all part of the beauty of HOS.





-Hyp.


----------



## barsoomcore (Jan 21, 2005)

Rule #582: Every appearance of a computer in a movie reduces that movie's intelligence by a factor of three.

I've NEVER seen it fail. I don't know who makes movies in Hollywood, but they evidently missed the last twenty years of technology development. Take a fine movie like _The Core_ -- written by our very own jonrog1, and a great fun movie. As long as you pay no attention to anything that happens while the "hacker" character is on screen. The movie would have been at least THREE HUNDRED times better had that character been expunged from it -- I base that on the estimate that computers appear onscreen about a hundred times, so it is three hundred times (Rule #582) stupider than it would have been otherwise. It's all very mathematical.


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 21, 2005)

The guy who is about to be married and thus is doomed to die. I remember watching "Navy Seals" and after the intro rescue we find out that one member of the team is getting married and I remember thinking "Why don't you just paint a bullseye on his back?" Sure enough he gets killed later in the movie and it's our hero's fault. 

It always makes me really appreciate Pete 'Dead Meat' Thompson from Hotshots! even more...


----------



## thalmin (Jan 21, 2005)

How about the auto collision where a car, usually one of several which are chasing the hero, hits another car then spirals into the air.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jan 21, 2005)

thalmin said:
			
		

> How about the auto collision where a car, usually one of several which are chasing the hero, hits another car then spirals into the air.




Hey, I just picked up the first seasons of The A-Team, Knight Rider, and The Dukes of Hazzard on DVD.

Don't mess with tradition!

(And let's not forget Blues Brothers 2000  )

-Hyp.


----------



## mojo1701 (Jan 21, 2005)

On the subject of computers in movies:

Everyone who has an e-mail account, when checking, has an AOL account (denoted by either the '@aol.com' ending, or the "You've got mail" voice).


----------



## Logan (Jan 21, 2005)

Any movie where a group of highly trained special forces soilders get taken out by something, and that something is taken out by the untrianed, either over- or under- aged hero.
Are our armed forces really that incompotent?


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 21, 2005)

Mercule said:
			
		

> Hero gets snot kicked out of him.  Hero gets more snot kicked out of him.  BBEG has hero exactly where he wants him.  Hero miraculously gets his second wind and defeats BBEG.




Hero then completes the rest of the episode/ movie, with no sign they're wounded beyond a blood stain.

"Five minutes ago, you could barely stand, and staggered to your feet to finish the evil guy. Now you're fine?"
"I drained his soul to power mine, it's really neat!"

Gratuitous slide/action racking on guns. It's not dramatic folks, it's just freaking silly.


----------



## BiggusGeekus (Jan 21, 2005)

My beef is when two people could resolve huge conflicts with less than 30 seconds of conversation.  The worse example was _Daredevil_.  Jennifer Gardner (Elektra) thinks Ben Affleck (Daredevil) has killed her father.  What does he do?  He runs away and creates High Drama.  What doesn't he do?  Say something like, "No, it wasn't me, it was that guy over there let's kick his butt."

I mean, these characters can deliver inspiring monologues after getting worked over with a baseball bat, but they can't tell each other who the bad guy is?


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jan 21, 2005)

Logan said:
			
		

> Any movie where a group of highly trained special forces soilders get taken out by something, and that something is taken out by the untrianed, either over- or under- aged hero.
> Are our armed forces really that incompotent?




  I second that. Although the exception that comes to my mind is James Cameron's _Aliens. _The Marines there were sent into a death trap. They were lead by a green officer into a situation where they couldn't use their most potent weapons, and had a traitor in their midst who's primary interest was to serve the needs of a mega-corporation. Can't blame them for getting their butts handed to them there.


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jan 21, 2005)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> Gratuitous slide/action racking on guns. It's not dramatic folks, it's just freaking silly.




 How about when a character has a revolver, flicks the cylinder out, spins it, stares with one eye into one of the breech chambers and then slams the cylinder back in? How many times has this been done now?!


----------



## kirinke (Jan 24, 2005)

SCI FI/FANTASY RULE
In which the uber BBEG isn't dead unless he falls from something tall (mountain, volcano, platform etc) into something unpleasant. Usually hot, radioactive or acidic. 

HORROR RULE
The BBEG never dies


----------



## S'mon (Jan 24, 2005)

Darth Shoju said:
			
		

> I second that. Although the exception that comes to my mind is James Cameron's _Aliens. _The Marines there were sent into a death trap. They were lead by a green officer into a situation where they couldn't use their most potent weapons, and had a traitor in their midst who's primary interest was to serve the needs of a mega-corporation. Can't blame them for getting their butts handed to them there.




ALIENS, being a good movie, maintained credibility.  It used a Vietnam analogy - and the troops were competent 'bug hunters' but the Colonial Marines weren't really Special Forces; they behaved more like regular Marines soldiers, and they weren't expecting anything as smart as the Aliens.   Their behaviour or defeat never seemed incredible or ruining of disbelief.

An example of a a bad movie that uses this cliche is Die Hard 2, where the airport SWAT team rides the elevator up to where they know the terrorists are, standing together in a nice tight group that promptly gets wiped out in 2 seconds, leaving Bruce to save the day.


----------



## Tanager (Jan 24, 2005)

here's one that bugs me all the time:

Our heroes are precariously hidden, with scant cover, say in field of long grass. The agents of the goverment/evil organization/whathaveyou have fanned out and are "searching" the area. One of them is advancing on the position of our heroes, a few more steps and he is sure to find them/trip over them/kick them in the head etc... At the last posible moment he is interupted by one of his buddies askin if he's seen anything, he stops, gives the area a cursory glance and turns away saying "no, nothing here" or some equivalent.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jan 24, 2005)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> Oh, and why is that movies promise no animals were harmed in the making of this motion picture, when we all know that dozens of cows pigs and assorted marine life were KILLED so that people could EAT them?




So that when we see the villain run over a random dog, or see a horse run off a cliff in a western, we can know that it's just movie magic rather than the makers doing what they used to do and running a real horse off a cliff or running over a real dog because it's cheaper and, hey, it's just a %^^&ing animal anyway, right?


----------



## Filby (Jan 24, 2005)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> So that when we see the villain run over a random dog, or see a horse run off a cliff in a western, we can know that it's just movie magic rather than the makers doing what they used to do and running a real horse off a cliff or running over a real dog because it's cheaper and, hey, it's just a %^^&ing animal anyway, right?




Or seeing a herd of cattle get pumped full of lead by a bipolar bank robber and then run over by the pursuing police vehicles.

"COWS?! I hate cows worse than I hate coppers! TAKE THAT, BESSIE! Hahahahahahaha!"


----------



## Felix (Jan 24, 2005)

Hero grabs hold of BIG HONKING PISTOL and proceeds to empty the 15-round clip in a space of 2 seconds... and there's _no fraggin recoil!_ It's a damnable CONTAINED EXPLOSION! His hand WILL MOVE SLIGHTLY!

Montages. Except for Rocky IV and Team America.

The preponderance of Doctors of Nuclear Astro-rocket Physi-quantam-surgery, who are also 18-year-old supermodels. Not that I _mind_ the 18 year old supermodel... it's not like a supermodel can't be written into any script.

The obnoxious hick caracature. Boy, that one slays me every time.

The Heavy-metal/Rap/Industrial music Preparation-for-the-big-fight scene. Nothing but hate for this one.


----------



## Elemental (Jan 24, 2005)

The kickass female character, who suddenly suffers amnesia about her fighting skills at some point when the plot calls for her to be taken captive.


The police turning up after the hero has single-handedly wiped out the bad guys. You know the scene. He's walking off, bloodied but okay, leaving behind the burning shell of the base, and only then do you hear sirens in the distance.


The superintelligent and indestructible serial killer, with the stealth of a ninja and teleportation, regeneration, and precognitive powers. Or to put it another way, the serial killer slaying someone in a way that would never work without script fiat.


Heavily armoured opponents, who never actually stop or mitigate a blow with said armour. See just about any fight scene in the LotR trilogy for an example. It would probably be better to go into battle naked in Middle-Earth, at least then you might have a chance of dodging attacks....


Supposed soldiers or police who were apparently taught to shoot by Helen Keller. I mean yeah, we know the hero is going to beat them, but there's a point at which incompetence just becomes silly. I've never been in a firefight, but if I was, I'd know certain things such as using cover, firing short bursts from an automatic weapon rather than spraying bullets everywhere, and attacking from more than one direction at the same time. (I'd probably still die, of course.)


----------



## Ferret (Jan 24, 2005)

I've got to agree with these, the Shouting-over-dead-loved-one and some others. How about these?

Someone gets shot and they fly back.

Someone dives through a window and is not painted red by their own blood.

The 'wow I know a martial art' scene where it looks choreographed and their is no action. Sure it's fine in movies where thats what it says on the tin, but in others ity get hackneyed.

Where we see the bad guy shoot, and don't see where the bullet goes then the good guy does the same and wee see 3 people drop dead.

Also the catchy last liner, that isn't catchy, and the evil monologue, whether or not plans are revealed. Some talking, ok. Anything more then 45 sec long is too much!


----------



## VirgilCaine (Jan 25, 2005)

Various said:
			
		

> "Heroes" who aren't held accountable. Now, I'm not talking about vigillante movies like Deathwish and The Punisher here. I'm talking about the cop, soldier, or whatever who "doesn't play by the rules". Look at the remake of Planet Of The Apes. Marky Mark disobeys orders and pretty much gets everyone killed. Why is he the hero?
> 
> 2) Explodium, the cheap substitute for metal used in most motor vehicles in movies. Gas tanks explode...we get it. But in many movies, it just seems ridiculous how many cars, trucks, helicopters, boats and what have you manage to turn into roaring fonts of explosive fire. I mean, I love a good explosion as much as the next guy, but if you overuse it, it loses the effect, guys.
> 
> ...




A) Death Wish? No, there was accountability...he got caught by the cops. He was just let go by the cops to make their job easier. It's not even an "action" movie (more like a drama IMO)--action movies never have the hero collapse of blood loss. 

But yeah, thats annoying.

B) Yeah. Hate that. Gasoline doesn't explode, except under specific conditions--temperature and such. Catch on fire, yes, explode, no.

C) No, it's because they have NPC classes. 

D) Silly that they never have shells fly out also.

E) Someone is shot _with a .45 ACP_ and they fly back--The Protectors. Jackie Chan's only movie where he has a gun.

Mine: 
The preponderance of double barreled shotguns. MOST ARE EXPENSIVE. AT LEAST A THOUSAND DOLLARS. Backwoods hicks (Deliverance cover) don't carry them.

_Amos and Andy_--white criminal and black rich guy are "trapped" by the police in the black mans home. Nicholas Cage is the white criminal...carries a sawed-off over and under shotgun...probably at least two thousand dollars, with some nice carvings on the wood furniture. Cut up with a hacksaw...
Not that I like trap/skeet or anything, but still, thats like pimping out a Lamborghini with I don't know what. It's ugly.

There is a nice line in that movie..the black man wants to know if the criminal is an assassin sent to kill him.
*points shotgun at bound black mans head*
"I have a shotgun. You have a frying pan. If I were an assassin, you'd be dead right now."


Lets see...

The action hero caricature. Former detective, special forces, soldier, whatever. All the same. Stays perfectly fit, knows martial arts like a master, can still shoot like a citizen who practices every week at the range (I won't say cop, because thats a movie cliche). 

Cops who can shoot. IRL most beat cops don't shoot that well. 

Jeepers Creepers: No resources. No food, no water, no weapons...yeah, lets follow the freaky monster!


----------



## S'mon (Jan 25, 2005)

Felix said:
			
		

> Hero grabs hold of BIG HONKING PISTOL and proceeds to empty the 15-round clip in a space of 2 seconds... and there's _no fraggin recoil!_ It's a damnable CONTAINED EXPLOSION! His hand WILL MOVE SLIGHTLY!




The zero recoil guns is a personal Hat of mine also.  Especially in movies with non-superhero protagonists; mob movies where the mobster fires 15 rounds in 2 seconds without any recoil (Goodfellas); I think the worst I've seen was Full Metal Jacket where one of the marines fires an M60 7.62 MM belt-fed _machine gun_ **one-handed**.   :\


----------



## mojo1701 (Jan 25, 2005)

Roger Ebert's Movie Glossary.

Go nuts.


----------



## Thanee (Jan 25, 2005)

Just recently I got reminded of something...

The hero/ine shows his/her sidekick a martial arts move and the sidekick uses that move later to defeat a villain who should normally just wipe the floor with him/her. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 25, 2005)

I hate, hate, hate when a character falls and catches himself (or herself) on a ledge (or cable) -- especially with one hand.  Try holding onto an easy-to-grip chin-up bar by one hand, with no momentum to overcome.  Now try jumping up and grabbing the bar with one hand.  Now try jumping off of something and catching yourself on the bar.  Not likely.  (If the character's Spiderman, OK; if the character's Mary Jane, not OK.)


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 25, 2005)

The laws of probability do not apply to movie poker.  If all you've got is a straight flush, fold immediately; everyone else has an even better hand.


----------



## Warrior Poet (Jan 25, 2005)

Despite the rate of acceleration of the pressure wave in the average explosion (let's say at least 10 dynamite sticks worth), the protagonists will be able to outrun it, and despite a leap at the end that (I guess) is supposed to represent the event horizon of the pressure wave catching the runners, said protagonists will come away unscathed.

Same is true for avalanches and landslides, evidently, despite the fact that some of them reach speeds in excess of 60 mph (100 kmh).

Come on!



			
				mmadsen said:
			
		

> The laws of probability do not apply to movie poker. If all you've got is a straight flush, fold immediately; everyone else has an even better hand.




 So true!

Warrior Poet


----------



## Warrior Poet (Jan 25, 2005)

Also, protagonists who have to make a rapid ascent from any significant depth of sea water, especially to escape a shark or other similarly threatening aquatic resident, will never suffer nitrogen narcosis, nor have to stop and equalize lung pressure, etc., etc.

Addendum:  one of the worst things you can do in movie land is board a submarine.  It's almost certain to spring a leak, suffer a depth-charge assault, hit the ocean floor, or be irradiated by a breach of the nuclear core.

Warrior Poet


----------



## Richards (Jan 26, 2005)

Or be attacked by a Japanese rubber-suit monster.  They seem to like chomping on submarines.

Johnathan


----------



## Pseudonym (Jan 26, 2005)

Pointless inclusion of a cute kid.  I kept waiting all the way through Mummy 2 for the kid to catch a bullet.  It's almost as bad as miraculously surviving dog.

Moronic pseudoscience.  Protagonist injects blood directly into a machine, looks at a screen a second later and exclaims "That's human DNA!"

Makes me twitch.


----------



## mojo1701 (Jan 26, 2005)

Richards said:
			
		

> They seem to like chomping on submarines.




They've watched one-too-many Subway commercials with Jared.


----------



## Abisashi (Jan 26, 2005)

I hate when the hero has to choose between saving the world/a bunch of innocents and his girlfriend, chooses his girlfriend, and still saves the world/innocent people. Best example I can think of is in Spiderman.

On a related note, I hate it when heroes with deontological ethics (D&D alignments fall under this), refuse to do the one thing that will save the world (kill the possesed child, etc.) because it is wrong, and things work out anyway. This happens a lot in books too.


----------



## replicant2 (Jan 26, 2005)

Elemental said:
			
		

> Heavily armoured opponents, who never actually stop or mitigate a blow with said armour. See just about any fight scene in the LotR trilogy for an example. It would probably be better to go into battle naked in Middle-Earth, at least then you might have a chance of dodging attacks....




Got to agree with this one. I don't know how many movies I've seen (cough) Braveheart (cough) where mailed soldiers are hewn through like tissue paper, arms and legs flying off with every sword-stroke.

Frankly, it's crap. Severing a limb ain't that easy _without_ armor. Trying to cut clear through chain, reinforced with layers of heavy quilted padding and/or leather, then muscle and bone with a single sword stroke is not going to happen. Broken bones, mail driven into wounds, sure. But a sword -- even a heavy, keen edged claymore a. la. the Scottish blades used in Braveheart -- isn't the same thing as a chainsaw or lightsaber.

The problem is even worse when it comes to plate armor. There's tons of historic accounts of knights in full plate dueling for an hour without serious injury. A dagger was specifically invented for the sole purpose of dispatching downed knights with thrusts through eyeslits and other openings, simply because fully armored knights were otherwise too hard to kill. Yet there's lots of movies where a warrior swinging a longsword one-handed will cut off a plate-mailed arm, or leg at the knee.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jan 26, 2005)

How about the main character turning to their parent/true love/spouse/best friend/mentor/trusted buddy, only to learn the parent/true love /spouse/best friend/mentor/trusted buddy is – in fact – evil, possibly insane and in on the evil plot from the start.

Above any beyond being done to death, this always makes me think the hero has really poor skills in picking friends.


----------



## Felix (Jan 26, 2005)

replicant2 said:
			
		

> Yet there's lots of movies where a warrior swinging a longsword one-handed will cut off a plate-mailed arm, or leg at the knee.



I'm going to agree with you for the most part, with one big ol exception...

In Excalibur when Uther is chasing Merlin down to get Arthur back, he's ambushed and knocked off his horse. When he gets up, he grabs his sword and is hit in the back by a sword or axe or something. He cries in pain, turns around and **WHACK** there goes Second Knight From The Left's arm.

But yeah, with that as an exception, I'll agree: armor should protect!


----------



## replicant2 (Jan 26, 2005)

Felix said:
			
		

> I'm going to agree with you for the most part, with one big ol exception...
> 
> In Excalibur when Uther is chasing Merlin down to get Arthur back, he's ambushed and knocked off his horse. When he gets up, he grabs his sword and is hit in the back by a sword or axe or something. He cries in pain, turns around and **WHACK** there goes Second Knight From The Left's arm.
> 
> But yeah, with that as an exception, I'll agree: armor should protect!




I don't mind that scene; the sword, after all, is Excalibur, and should cut through armor like tissue paper. Excalibur as a movie doesn't pretend to historic accuracy -- it's highly stylized and deliberately anachronistic. Does anyone really believe that those were "The Dark Ages?" as told in the opening sequence of the film? What dark ages had plate mailed knights riding around sans helmets?

But yeah, generally it's a miracle when armor does protect anyone -- look at Frodo and the mithril shirt in Lord of the Rings. As audiences, we expect anyone stabbed with a weapon or shot with an arrow will be instantly slain, unless they happen to be the hero.


----------



## Thanee (Jan 26, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> The laws of probability do not apply to movie poker.  If all you've got is a straight flush, fold immediately; everyone else has an even better hand.




Not in Lock, Stock and two smoking Barrels. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jan 26, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Not in Lock, Stock and two smoking Barrels.
> 
> Bye
> Thanee



 Because its an awesome movie that rocks.  And I think I'm going to put the DVD in now.


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jan 26, 2005)

Friend of mine gets annoyed when the hero/heroes enter a building and proceed to search the place using tiny flashlights, instead of simply _turning on the lights_.


----------



## Wolf72 (Jan 26, 2005)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> Right. If the baddy has attacked me or mine and I have him down, I'm not stopping until I see grey matter.




exactly! ... how many times  has Jason been knocked down only to have the witless victim run away ... I'da turned him into hamburger.

... there's also the movies where the female character gets a good hit on a bad guy, stuns him for a moment  ... but doesn't follow thru! ... at that point I usually hope the female character gets killed.  ... right, and never put your improvised weapon down, keep using it!


----------



## MaxKaladin (Jan 26, 2005)

Warrior Poet said:
			
		

> Despite the rate of acceleration of the pressure wave in the average explosion (let's say at least 10 dynamite sticks worth), the protagonists will be able to outrun it, and despite a leap at the end that (I guess) is supposed to represent the event horizon of the pressure wave catching the runners, said protagonists will come away unscathed.



If I ever get the chance to make a parody movie, I will include a scene where the protagonists are running from an explosion, one trips over his shoelace and falls.  The explosion will stop in place while the protagonist gets up, ties his shoelace and starts running again.  Then the explosion will start back up and the scene will continue as normal.


----------



## Look_a_Unicorn (Jan 27, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> You mean like Hollywood movies with a non-happy ending?
> 
> Bye
> Thanee




Beat me to it 

It's really annoying how Hollywood seems to think that they have to "protect" us by only showing positive outcomes in movies. I don't mean that all elements of escapism should be removed from movies- it's just that there can be beauty in showing how, in real life, your loved ones can die or leave you or that sometimes people can make mistakes and have to live with them rather than it always being whitewashed into a fairytale ending.

Of course sometimes we need pure escapism, definitely. Heroism, glory and victory for the good guys. I'm all for it. But please please please don't say your "protecting innocent minds" by not allowing adolescents to be educated as to the reality of loss, suffering and grief. They are all parts of human existance, and everyone has to face them eventually. Movies that addressed these issues well (and played in something other than small/independant theaters) would potentially help people coming to grips with these things for the first time- as well as entertain.

If this does happen, maybe people would be less ashamed of their hurts and happier to seek comfort and help from family and friends (I think human contact is better than professional help, if one is lucky enough to have access to it)

Or am I wrong and it IS better to hope we can swaddle other humans so well they know only good things for all of their lives?


----------



## mojo1701 (Jan 27, 2005)

Look_a_Unicorn said:
			
		

> Of course sometimes we need pure escapism, definitely. Heroism, glory and victory for the good guys. I'm all for it. But please please please don't say your "protecting innocent minds" by not allowing adolescents to be educated as to the reality of loss, suffering and grief. They are all parts of human existance, and everyone has to face them eventually. Movies that addressed these issues well (and played in something other than small/independant theaters) would potentially help people coming to grips with these things for the first time- as well as entertain.




I, still technically a teenager, agree. I had the misfortune of having a good friend pass away as I was still in the 8th grade. I dealt with it. I didn't hide it. Sure, I was sad, and all the rest that comes with the territory, but I wasn't shielded from it.

If something happens, you SHOULD be told, and then be allowed to express whatever you need. Not like in the movies, "Your... uh... your dog got... oh, jeez, how do I tell you... your dog... went to live on a farm."

Okay, so the dog went to live on a farm is a cliche, but still... Emotional drama is a powerful thing.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jan 27, 2005)

Lord Pendragon said:
			
		

> Friend of mine gets annoyed when the hero/heroes enter a building and proceed to search the place using tiny flashlights, instead of simply _turning on the lights_.




Your friend PvP?  

Someone responded to that strip:
"They use flashlights to concentrate thier attention as much as shedding light on the subject. The beam limits their field of view, increasing their chances of spotting the hairs or chunk of skin etc. It's a proven technique. It's part psychology and part physiology, but it works."

-Hyp.


----------



## Warrior Poet (Jan 27, 2005)

MaxKaladin said:
			
		

> If I ever get the chance to make a parody movie, I will include a scene where the protagonists are running from an explosion, one trips over his shoelace and falls.  The explosion will stop in place while the protagonist gets up, ties his shoelace and starts running again.  Then the explosion will start back up and the scene will continue as normal.






You rock.



			
				Thanee said:
			
		

> Not in Lock, Stock and two smoking Barrels.




The game's rigged -- different movie paradigm.

Thankfully, a refreshing change of pace from the usual.  I have a friend who gets really worked up because of the final hand of poker in the amusing-but-forgettable _Maverick_ with Mel Gibson, and how it works out that he has this incredible hand that somehow validates his whole philosophy for the movie or somesuch.

More:  Sports Movies seem to always have the obligatory slow-motion agonized waiting scene.  Will the basketball drop through the hoop?  Will the wide receiver catch the football?  Will the base runner slide into home safely?  Will I care long enough to sit and watch?

Warrior Poet


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jan 28, 2005)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Your friend PvP?



HA.  No, though I couldn't say whether that's where _she_ got the idea.







> Someone responded to that strip:
> "They use flashlights to concentrate thier attention as much as shedding light on the subject. The beam limits their field of view, increasing their chances of spotting the hairs or chunk of skin etc. It's a proven technique. It's part psychology and part physiology, but it works."



Interesting, though I find that hard to believe.  Perhaps if they were finished looking over the crime scene and then wanted to reexamine a particular spot, in order to find hairs on the carpet, for example, they might turn the lights back off.  But when first entering?

I think I'd have to be convinced by an actual accredited psychiatrist or behavioral psychologist (or actual CSI person) that it is indeed more effective to keep the lights off.  Interesting idea, though.


----------



## Kast (Jan 28, 2005)

So far we've seen mostly action movie hackneys.

How about the morning after any love-scene, one character (usually the main character) will invariably wake up to find his or her partner missing.

Also, if the movie starts with the main character in bed with someone, that character (usually partially nude) will never be seen again.

My Cousin Vinny reminded me of this one. If a character is put in Jail, or is visiting someone in Jail, the destination jail cell is always the last one on the end and all the other prisoners are in lock down, allowing them to whistle, make noise and comment from behind their cell bars.


----------



## Look_a_Unicorn (Jan 28, 2005)

mojo1701 said:
			
		

> I, still technically a teenager, agree. I had the misfortune of having a good friend pass away as I was still in the 8th grade. I dealt with it. I didn't hide it. Sure, I was sad, and all the rest that comes with the territory, but I wasn't shielded from it.
> 
> If something happens, you SHOULD be told, and then be allowed to express whatever you need. Not like in the movies, "Your... uh... your dog got... oh, jeez, how do I tell you... your dog... went to live on a farm."
> 
> Okay, so the dog went to live on a farm is a cliche, but still... Emotional drama is a powerful thing.




Sorry if it seemed I was talking down to anyone who was a teenager 

My beef was with those who would have fully grown adults with no notion of how to express loss or grief because their prime educator (entertainment media) didn't help them out.
But then I have an entirely seperate rant ready to go on the subject of education via media


----------



## mojo1701 (Jan 28, 2005)

Look_a_Unicorn said:
			
		

> Sorry if it seemed I was talking down to anyone who was a teenager




It didn't. I just happened to be reminded of this.



> _My beef was with those who would have fully grown adults with no notion of how to express loss or grief because their prime educator (entertainment media) didn't help them out.
> But then I have an entirely seperate rant ready to go on the subject of education via media _




Yeah. Absolutely.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jan 28, 2005)

Lord Pendragon said:
			
		

> HA.  No, though I couldn't say whether that's where _she_ got the idea.Interesting, though I find that hard to believe.  Perhaps if they were finished looking over the crime scene and then wanted to reexamine a particular spot, in order to find hairs on the carpet, for example, they might turn the lights back off.  But when first entering?
> 
> I think I'd have to be convinced by an actual accredited psychiatrist or behavioral psychologist (or actual CSI person) that it is indeed more effective to keep the lights off.  Interesting idea, though.




Maybe it´s time for a "self-experiment" - 
Get a flashlight, turn off the light, drop a needle (preferably so that you don´t know or see where it will land  ), leave the room, reenter room and search.
You might want to set a stop watch to measure the time needed.
Repeat this with the light on. 

And if you only find it 4 days laters by stepping barefoot on it, I am very sorry, but the risk of these self-experiments is always on the experimentator...


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 28, 2005)

Look_a_Unicorn said:
			
		

> It's really annoying how Hollywood seems to think that they have to "protect" us by only showing positive outcomes in movies. I don't mean that all elements of escapism should be removed from movies- it's just that there can be beauty in showing how, in real life, your loved ones can die or leave you or that sometimes people can make mistakes and have to live with them rather than it always being whitewashed into a fairytale ending.



Hollywood isn't trying to protect us; Hollywood is trying to sell movie tickets.


----------



## Azlan (Jan 29, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> My personal pet peeve is the "I've just hit the villain in the genitals, and I've got him rolling on the ground in pain, so NOW I'm going to run away from him."




Tell me about it!

In a recent movie, the main character - who, up until this point, I thought was such a smart guy - shoots the villain, stunning him and dropping him to the floor, and then the main character grabs the girl and runs away with her. Then the villain gets up - of course! - and chases them, and a big, drawn-out chase through the subway ensues; all because the main character was not smart enough to check see if the villain was dead, or at least to fire a couple more rounds into him, point-blank, while he was stunned and prone on the floor.



That was yet another one of those movies where the  last 10 minutes ruined it for me.


----------



## Azlan (Jan 29, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> Hollywood isn't trying to protect us; Hollywood is trying to sell movie tickets.




Exactly. You shouldn't be annoyed with Hollywood so much as you should be with American audiences; who, in general, _want_ total escapism, with all movie endings being upbeat and tidy.


----------



## ssampier (Jan 29, 2005)

*not sure it's a cliche*

But what's the appeal of all these natural disaster movies? Twister, Volcano, Dante's Peak, Day After Tomorrow. All feature terrible, unescapable forces of disaster, yet still feature heroes who save the day somehow. Seems like a waste of Man versus nature.

Pet peeve, I know


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jan 29, 2005)

ssampier said:
			
		

> But what's the appeal of all these natural disaster movies? Twister, Volcano, Dante's Peak, Day After Tomorrow. All feature terrible, unescapable forces of disaster, yet still feature heroes who save the day somehow. Seems like a waste of Man versus nature.
> 
> Pet peeve, I know



 Well, in Day After Tommorrow at least, no one really saved the day...


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jan 29, 2005)

Azlan said:
			
		

> Exactly. You shouldn't be annoyed with Hollywood so much as you should be with American audiences; who, in general, _want_ total escapism, with all movie endings being upbeat and tidy.



I am such an American audience member, in a way.  Recently I was talking with my brother, who has a rather large DVD collection, many of which have the director's preferred ending.  The one Hollywood overrode.  So far nine-times out of ten, it's nothing I want to see.

Basically, if I'm watching a heavy, angst-ridden movie, I don't mind a heavy, angst-ridden ending.  Take _The Butterfly Effect_, for instance.  There's a darker ending on the DVD, which the director preferred, that fit the film well I thought.  So in that case, Hollywood may have jumped the gun, IMO, tidying something that didn't need to be tidied.

But there are also other movies, such as _Eurotrip_ and _Dodgeball_ which illustrate the other side of the equasion.  These movies are mindless, fun movies.  Why in the world would I want a depressing ending to this kind of film?  The whole point of the film is mindless, light fun.  The ending should be no different.  And in both cases, Hollywood saved me from a pointlessly depressing ending I wouldn't have liked (that the director preferred.)

So playing the odds, I'm glad for Hollywood.  I lose the one ending out of ten that may have been appropriate, and get nine out of ten endings that are.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Jan 29, 2005)

Hmm. What was the original ending to Dodgeball? Come to think of it, how was the released ending? 




			
				Felix said:
			
		

> Montages. Except for Rocky IV and Team America.



The hours approaching, just give it your best
 You got to reach your prime.
 That’s when you need to put yourself to the test,
 And show us a passage of time,
 Were going to need a montage (montage)
 Oh it takes a montage (montage)

 Sure a lot of things happing at once,
 With mind, everyone what’s going on (what’s going on?)
 And when every shot you show a little improvement
 Just Show it or it will take to long
 that’s called a montage (montage)
 Oh we want montage (montage)

 And anything that we want to know, from just a beginner to a pro,
 You want a montage (montage) 
 even rocky had a montage (montage)

 (Montage…montage)

 Anything that we want to know, from just a beginner to a pro,
 You need a montage (montage)
 Oh it takes a montage (montage)

 Always fade out in a montage,
 If you fade out, it seem like more time
 Has passed in a montage,
 Montage


----------



## Kesh (Jan 29, 2005)

nothing to see here said:
			
		

> Outside of Aliens 3, I can't remember a movie which included a scene featuring needless dog-death, and let's face, Aliens 3 sucked.




Check out _Dog Soldiers_ then. A major plot point involves the senseless killing of a dog.


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jan 29, 2005)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> Hmm. What was the original ending to Dodgeball? Come to think of it, how was the released ending?



I haven't seen it yet myself, though I want to.  According to my brother: (Spoiler, highlight to read)



Spoiler



In the released ending, the underdog team wins.  In the director's cut ending, they lose.


 (End spoiler)


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 29, 2005)

Look_a_Unicorn said:
			
		

> It's really annoying how Hollywood seems to think that they have to "protect" us by only showing positive outcomes in movies. I don't mean that all elements of escapism should be removed from movies- it's just that there can be beauty in showing how, in real life, your loved ones can die or leave you or that sometimes people can make mistakes and have to live with them rather than it always being whitewashed into a fairytale ending.



Earlier I noted that Hollywood isn't trying to protect us; Hollywood is trying to sell tickets.

There's another point though: a Hollywood movie isn't meant to be a complete depiction of life or even a random (statistically valid) slice of life; it depicts a particular conflict playing out through its resolution.  A Hollywood movie often shows many terrible, negative things.  The inciting incident that kicks off the action is something bad.  The rising conflict is, naturally, a sequence of bad things.  Then, when the conflict is resolved, _we end the movie_.

If we were to make a Hollywood movie of your life, we wouldn't start at the beginning of your life, include everything in the middle, and end today; we'd find an interesting conflict, set it up, watch it play out, then witness the resolution.  And that's all we'd put into the narrative.  That's what a Hollywood film _is_: a narrative with a beginning, middle, and end.


----------



## Kesh (Jan 29, 2005)

The good guy turns a corner, gun at ready, only to find that the bad guy has an innocent/loved one hostage. Bad guy demands the good guy put his gun down... and the good guy _does it_. Then, a miracle occurs, and the bad guy is defeated anyway.

Just for once (outside of an episode of _Cowboy Bebop_), I want to see the hero shoot the bad guy in the face. Because the bad guy *always* makes sure the hero has a clean shot at his head while gloating about how "weak" the hero is.


----------



## kirinke (Jan 30, 2005)

Heh, in one of the newer bond flicks... Tommorow never dies I believe, in a training exercise, Bond shoots his boss who was being held hostage by a bad guy, then shoots the bad guy in the head. The boss survived, because it was only a flesh wound. Too bad it was only a VR exercise.


----------



## Branduil (Jan 30, 2005)

Kesh said:
			
		

> The good guy turns a corner, gun at ready, only to find that the bad guy has an innocent/loved one hostage. Bad guy demands the good guy put his gun down... and the good guy _does it_. Then, a miracle occurs, and the bad guy is defeated anyway.
> 
> Just for once *(outside of an episode of Cowboy Bebop),* I want to see the hero shoot the bad guy in the face. Because the bad guy *always* makes sure the hero has a clean shot at his head while gloating about how "weak" the hero is.




That was the most awesome scene ever.


----------



## mojo1701 (Jan 30, 2005)

kirinke said:
			
		

> Heh, in one of the newer bond flicks... Tommorow never dies I believe, in a training exercise, Bond shoots his boss who was being held hostage by a bad guy, then shoots the bad guy in the head. The boss survived, because it was only a flesh wound. Too bad it was only a VR exercise.




Reminds me of the "Enterprise" episode "North Star," when 



Spoiler



Reed rescues T'Pol, being held at gunpoint by one of the cowboys by shooting her, then shooting him (both shots, of course, on STUN, but the cowboy didn't know that).


----------



## Starman (Jan 30, 2005)

kirinke said:
			
		

> Heh, in one of the newer bond flicks... Tommorow never dies I believe, in a training exercise, Bond shoots his boss who was being held hostage by a bad guy, then shoots the bad guy in the head. The boss survived, because it was only a flesh wound. Too bad it was only a VR exercise.




Harry Temple: All right, pop quiz. Airport. Gunman with one hostage. He's using her for cover; he's almost to a plane. You're a hundred feet away. Jack? 
Jack: Shoot the hostage. 

Starman


----------



## Look_a_Unicorn (Jan 30, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> Earlier I noted that Hollywood isn't trying to protect us; Hollywood is trying to sell tickets.
> 
> There's another point though: a Hollywood movie isn't meant to be a complete depiction of life or even a random (statistically valid) slice of life; it depicts a particular conflict playing out through its resolution.  A Hollywood movie often shows many terrible, negative things.  The inciting incident that kicks off the action is something bad.  The rising conflict is, naturally, a sequence of bad things.  Then, when the conflict is resolved, _we end the movie_.
> 
> If we were to make a Hollywood movie of your life, we wouldn't start at the beginning of your life, include everything in the middle, and end today; we'd find an interesting conflict, set it up, watch it play out, then witness the resolution.  And that's all we'd put into the narrative.  That's what a Hollywood film _is_: a narrative with a beginning, middle, and end.




I temporarily forgot that the main drive to the industries is not to amaze or share with us, but to make money. Sure- the writors and actors may want to do just that, but I doubt they are the ones who decide which scripts get the funding.
Safe films, please the majority... it does all make sense.
I guess... no that's not rue, I KNOW I was in a whingy "why can't things be just the way I want them" mood with my first post. Thanks for dose of reality 

But a point I'd like to discuss- the rating system. In no way am I saying we can do without it- it's very useful for parents to have an idea of what they're children will be getting exposed to ( and as so much of the escapist, turn-brain-off-and-watch-the-explosions type movies revolve around violence and sex you would want to ration out the amount they see)- but if you look into our history, original forms of entertainment like storytelling (verbally, song-form or written form) all contained lots of warnings about nagative outcomes of bad decisions, or the pain of losing loved ones- I think one of the most obvious places you can see the translation is the original form of "Fairy Tale stories" which were often very grim- Grimm even- and the current, Disney-fied versions, which sugar coat everything.

Finally, is this the madsen of Little Gamers fame?


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 31, 2005)

Look_a_Unicorn said:
			
		

> Finally, is this the madsen of Little Gamers fame?



Nope.


----------



## drnuncheon (Jan 31, 2005)

Kesh said:
			
		

> Just for once (outside of an episode of _Cowboy Bebop_), I want to see the hero shoot the bad guy in the face. Because the bad guy *always* makes sure the hero has a clean shot at his head while gloating about how "weak" the hero is.




I can think of two other instances - _The Fifth Element_ ("Anyone else want to negotiate?") and Firefly.  Enjoy!

J


----------



## mmadsen (Jan 31, 2005)

Look_a_Unicorn said:
			
		

> ... but if you look into our history, original forms of entertainment like storytelling (verbally, song-form or written form) all contained lots of warnings about nagative outcomes of bad decisions, or the pain of losing loved ones- I think one of the most obvious places you can see the translation is the original form of "Fairy Tale stories" which were often very grim- Grimm even- and the current, Disney-fied versions, which sugar coat everything.



My (second) point was that Hollywood films, even Disney films, _do_ contain plenty of bad stuff -- all through the film _until the end_.  In a Hollywood film, we start the story with the introduction of the conflict, then we watch the conflict escalate, then we witness its resolution.  Once the conflict's resolved, we end the movie.

Snow White, for instance, is hiding from the jealous witch/queen -- who _poisons_ her.  _Bambi_ opens with hunters killing Bambi's mother.  In _Sleeping Beauty_, Maleficent curses Princess Aurora to die from a poisoned spinning wheel.  Even in a Disney film, bad things happen -- but we see the characters through.  The story ends in a happy place, but only after many unhappy things have happened.


----------



## Look_a_Unicorn (Jan 31, 2005)

mmadsen said:
			
		

> My (second) point was that Hollywood films, even Disney films, _do_ contain plenty of bad stuff -- all through the film _until the end_.  In a Hollywood film, we start the story with the introduction of the conflict, then we watch the conflict escalate, then we witness its resolution.  Once the conflict's resolved, we end the movie.
> 
> Snow White, for instance, is hiding from the jealous witch/queen -- who _poisons_ her.  _Bambi_ opens with hunters killing Bambi's mother.  In _Sleeping Beauty_, Maleficent curses Princess Aurora to die from a poisoned spinning wheel.  Even in a Disney film, bad things happen -- but we see the characters through.  The story ends in a happy place, but only after many unhappy things have happened.




I think I see what you mean. The only counterpoint I can make to that is a bit trite- that all the characters who die or have bad things happen are usually set-point characters who exist only to die or have bad things happen- it may be different for the age group such movies are aimed at, but I can't develop emotional attachment or see any real significance if a character dying who existed ONLY to die as part of the main characters story.

Someone mentioned the Butterfly Effect, I thought that movie was a mind-blowing counterpoint to my whinge about everything always working out so sugar-coated


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 31, 2005)

replicant2 said:
			
		

> But yeah, generally it's a miracle when armor does protect anyone -- look at Frodo and the mithril shirt in Lord of the Rings. As audiences, we expect anyone stabbed with a weapon or shot with an arrow will be instantly slain, unless they happen to be the hero.



Right, the mithril shirt stops a poke... but it's a cave troll poke!
You'd have a super neat shirt with a red pasty pulp in between, not a slo-mo hobbit moment!


----------



## Darrell (Jan 31, 2005)

Kesh said:
			
		

> The good guy turns a corner, gun at ready, only to find that the bad guy has an innocent/loved one hostage. Bad guy demands the good guy put his gun down... and the good guy _does it_. Then, a miracle occurs, and the bad guy is defeated anyway.
> 
> Just for once (outside of an episode of _Cowboy Bebop_), I want to see the hero shoot the bad guy in the face. Because the bad guy *always* makes sure the hero has a clean shot at his head while gloating about how "weak" the hero is.




Mel Gibson in _The Patriot_.  When Benjamin Martin (Gibson) is rescuing his son, who is held prisoner by the British, one of the foot-soldiers holds said offspring hostage, with a knife at his throat.  THWACK!  Thrown tomahawk to the head.  Love it.

Regards,
Darrell


----------



## billd91 (Jan 31, 2005)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> How about the main character turning to their parent/true love/spouse/best friend/mentor/trusted buddy, only to learn the parent/true love /spouse/best friend/mentor/trusted buddy is – in fact – evil, possibly insane and in on the evil plot from the start.
> 
> Above any beyond being done to death, this always makes me think the hero has really poor skills in picking friends.




Ah yes. But for every one of the cliche uses of these topics, there's at least one movie for which they are relatively innovative and interesting. And it's partly because of these good uses that they become cliche in the first place. 
I'm thinking here of the brainwashed soldier's Chinese-agent handler in the original Manchurian Candidate...  brilliant movie.


----------



## Stone Angel (Feb 1, 2005)

I am sick of someones gun jamming in a firefight usually well timed to ensure the protagonists survival, if you are a professional you would probably have a well working piece of equipment or drop crappy piece of blank weapon and draw a secondary weapon or grab one nearby not stand there like a crash test dummy smacking your gun and cursing waiting to die a buffoon.

Stabber chase scenes! Too long and drawn out. Grab something heavy and smack that motha
and get it over with.

Capturing the bbeg, deciding not to kill them, but then the bbeg pulls a concealed weapon out and is forced to be dealt with.

When the seemingly most adequate member of a group dies first usually the victim of circumstance eventually leaving only a lone inexperienced youngin to herald their cause to victory whatever that may be.

This applies to horror movies mostly Freddie and Jason type. The bbeg is defeated and everyone is hugging and celebrating. Some while later right at the end of the movie something happens that is a trademark of the bbeg. Groan lame


The Seraph of Earth and Stone


----------



## WizarDru (Feb 1, 2005)

Stone Angel said:
			
		

> I am sick of someones gun jamming in a firefight usually well timed to ensure the protagonists survival, if you are a professional you would probably have a well working piece of equipment or drop crappy piece of blank weapon and draw a secondary weapon or grab one nearby not stand there like a crash test dummy smacking your gun and cursing waiting to die a buffoon.




Can you give a couple of examples, there?  I can't recall seeing a scene like this, so I'm curious where it's been used.


----------



## Rigil Kent (Feb 1, 2005)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> How about the main character turning to their parent/true love/spouse/best friend/mentor/trusted buddy, only to learn the parent/true love /spouse/best friend/mentor/trusted buddy is – in fact – evil, possibly insane and in on the evil plot from the start.




Taking this one step further, I hate how the villain who has been pretending to be a great person abandons this role as soon as the Hero learns of his treachery.  That animated movie Titan AE is a perfect example of this and it makes NO sense.  Why would he abandon the fake role of the good guy once ONE person knows his true allegiance?

I'd like to see a movie in which they take all of these cliches and avoid them.  The super-spy's identical twin is thrust into a situation that he is totally unprepared for and, instead of attacking the Evil Warehouse of Doom himself, he calls in the Navy SEALS.  He gets the drop on a bad guy and shoots him in the face.  The love interest tries the sexy stripper dance to get a weapon from a Faceless Mook but the Mook shoots her in the face.  Etc.

It would probably bomb in the box office though...


----------



## Berandor (Feb 1, 2005)

Stone Angel said:
			
		

> Capturing the bbeg, deciding not to kill them, but then the bbeg pulls a concealed weapon out and is forced to be dealt with.



I hate this. Why do studios believe we always want to see the bad guy dead? Why kill the Joker? And this scene (see above) has really been done to death.
But also why cops never shoot a baddie in the shoulder, or knee - they always shoot to kill (unless the baddie is a hero, as in Out of Sight).

Another (from fairly different types of movies):
The hero(ine) is getting married, and suddenly her true love appears and they get together at the final minute, leaving the prospective spouse standing at the altar.


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Feb 1, 2005)

Berandor said:
			
		

> But also why cops never shoot a baddie in the shoulder, or knee - they always shoot to kill (unless the baddie is a hero, as in Out of Sight).



Actually, they shoot to _hit_.  It's a lot harder to try and hit someone in the shoulder or the knee, than it is to aim dead center.  There's a far greater chance of missing altogether.  And when someone is pointing a gun at me, I'm far more concerned about putting him down before he can put me down, than I am about just wounding him.


----------



## ragboy (Feb 1, 2005)

Rigil Kent said:
			
		

> It would probably bomb in the box office though...




And we'd be discussing how 'shooting someone in the face' was a tired scene...


----------



## Elemental (Feb 1, 2005)

Kast said:
			
		

> So far we've seen mostly action movie hackneys.
> 
> How about the morning after any love-scene, one character (usually the main character) will invariably wake up to find his or her partner missing.
> 
> Also, if the movie starts with the main character in bed with someone, that character (usually partially nude) will never be seen again.




Speaking of that, how about the amazing L-shaped sheets which post-coitus, will reach up to the navel of the man, but somehow reach up to shoulder level on the woman right next to him?


----------

