Post by: Neonivek on July 27, 2012, 02:43:11 pm
Yet I cannot be the only one who has ever found a small detail in something, unimportant or not, and was somehow unable to get beyond it. What are your movies, games, or anything where a single small detail seems to derail your enjoyment?
I'll go first: School of Rock
School of Rock is a movie about a guy who has his band break up. So he poses as a substitute teacher and uses his class as his new band.
I am not afraid to say I don't like Jack Black but his acting was fine here, he was mostly devoid of his common tendency to overact and mug. So this was one of the few Jack Black movies where I actually liked his performance. What killed this for me however was that fact that the movie sort of overlooks how outragously immoral, damaging, and inconvenient his action is. He is litterally stopping school for over a month to use children to make his own dreams come true. Something that means the children would have all needed to go to summer school and need re-education.
I would have been fine with it even slightly if the movie also recognised that... but no. Apperantly this act is supposed to be heroic because "He sees the potential in these children that their parents do not". Yeah I am soo sure the "Back up dancer" kids and the "Lights" kids have had such a fulfilling experience.
I could not enjoy it. It was glorifying something horrific.
Post by: Levi on July 27, 2012, 02:48:28 pm
Looking at you Stargate SG1!
Looking at you Assassins Creed!
Post by: Neonivek on July 27, 2012, 02:53:29 pm
Post by: SoHowAreYou on July 27, 2012, 02:56:03 pm
Post by: GreatJustice on July 27, 2012, 02:59:01 pm
Honestly that aspect of Assassins Creed was so stupid that I just imagined that the machine was actually a time reader that needed a DNA match to work.
I was willing to go with it to a point, but the whole "synchronization" stuff really made me wonder. Since taking damage of any kind reduces synchronization, that would imply Altair/Ezio were never, ever injured.
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 27, 2012, 02:59:30 pm
-snip-AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT DISAPPEARED!
Moving on, I tend to do this with all movies - but my greatest nitpicks have to do with military blunders in movies. This is of course taking into account the purpose of the story, the story takes precedence.
As you know, military blunders are perfectly acceptable on the account of drama and character development.
But when they introduce the *oh so competent* humanoids with their brilliant plan to unload several megatons of explosives onto a mountain, and then to send tanks UNSUPPORTED BY INFANTRY who then get ISOLATED AND TORN APART, it makes you think.
I mean, they just got introduced as the people that were killing generic enemy x. And now they're falling to pieces.
Oh yeah and then the infantry get torn to pieces because they had no tank support. Big wonder eh?
Post by: Darvi on July 27, 2012, 03:04:26 pm
I was willing to go with it to a point, but the whole "synchronization" stuff really made me wonder. Since taking damage of any kind reduces synchronization, that would imply Altair/Ezio were never, ever injured.Well duh. Altair is, after all, the patron god of killstealers (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Pantheon/LifeAndDeath).
Post by: Urist Imiknorris on July 27, 2012, 03:06:53 pm
Post by: Sheb on July 27, 2012, 03:10:33 pm
Or Avatar: You have access to fuckin spaceship. Why don't you nuke the native from orbit rather than going into a fuckin stupid deathtrap?
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 27, 2012, 03:35:16 pm
I hate when stuff just don't make sense in movies. Like Terminator 3: Why would you want your killer robots to be motorcycle? Why would you include control on them so that a human may use them? Why do you have a fully-fleshed user interface in Skynet's lair?The Rda operates a multi million project (the avatar project), solely for PR issues. They can not afford a genocide.
Or Avatar: You have access to fuckin spaceship. Why don't you nuke the native from orbit rather than going into a fuckin stupid deathtrap?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Really, it would be similair to carpet bombing an entire village just because there might be a few terrorists inside. Or burning entire swatches of jungle with napalm to drive out guerilla troops.
Only a tad worse since you're talking about bows and arrows natives vs gunships
Post by: Sheb on July 27, 2012, 03:38:16 pm
Post by: Jopax on July 27, 2012, 03:42:09 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 27, 2012, 03:50:26 pm
Makes them a pretty shitty company if they can't cover up a genocide on a backwards ass world only they have access to, seeing as much worse stuff was covered up here on earth.A compagny who's funding exceeds that of several countries has many enemies who just need an excuse to try and take them down. Considering the internet and stuff, I doubt that whitout killing/ keeping everyone there word would have out.
Why take such risks when they could just take out an iconic part of their culture and be done with it. It's not like the natives could do any serious harm.
Well, or use missiles then.Flux vortex jams automatic tracking. Also, why would a mining compagny have long range missiles?
Avatar has it's flaws, but I don't consider not going genocidal one of them. The humans aren't evil or something, they just prefer profits
Post by: Sheb on July 27, 2012, 04:00:11 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 27, 2012, 04:03:13 pm
Man, they have tanks and gunships.... The only reasons they don't have missiles is rule of cool really.I didn't see any tanks last time I watched.
Besides, the missiles would have worked anyway. The Dragon couldn't hit a target only a few hundred meter away untill it launched it's fourth missile.
Post by: Sheb on July 27, 2012, 04:06:06 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 27, 2012, 04:18:38 pm
the missiles could only be used line-of-sight, they could still use them, just not their tracking systems.This, and how are you going to justify storing long range missiles. (Also, the jamming magnetical effect is persistent on the entire planet(though much weaker). That's why they are using outdated technology, and don't have any fancy 22the era technology) You can justify having armoured helicopters (Giant pterodactyls in the sky), using armoured mechs (These are actually quite widespread, according to the guide) but not missiles.
As for the mechs, they're more glorified exosuits than mechs. They are not that strong.
If you want to nitpick about idiots things, try
1. The existence of live on the planet
2. Why are we using those fragile prop engines again?
3. The entire Na'Vi battle strategy
Post by: Sheb on July 27, 2012, 04:26:14 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 27, 2012, 04:29:44 pm
Also, why are the Na'vi the only vertebrate that don't have a 6-legged body plan?The Ikran are fourlimbed to.
The entire biology doesn't make much sense. Not even going to try and defend that.
Edit: Well technically it's possible, it's just that the chance is undescribely small. I mean, the chance of their being live near alpha centauri is already astronomically small, and then we're talking about microbiological live.
Note: There's some equation which was solved by some smart scientists and a lot of guessing which suggests that there are about 20 intelligent alien civilazations in the universe.
Post by: Euld on July 27, 2012, 04:31:53 pm
Post by: zombie urist on July 27, 2012, 05:39:35 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: kaijyuu on July 27, 2012, 05:48:09 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lectorog on July 27, 2012, 05:49:49 pm
There are several plot holes in Inception which bother me.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: forsaken1111 on July 27, 2012, 05:56:16 pm
I get irked whenever a sci-fi makes reference to genetic memory. I know its sci-fi and I know I'm not supposed to think too hard about it, but for some reason the idea of storing all the information in your brain inside your DNA really bothers me.The human genome itself has about three billion base pairs I think, times two because humans are diploid. So if you need two bits to encode each base pair and are working on a 32-bit byte that's 375,000,000 bytes to store it all. ~1.5GB for 8-bit bytes. I suppose it depends on how efficient the data storage is. If an alien's DNA is Polyploid and/or has more base pairs, that number increases exponentially. DNA is a remarkably efficient storage medium if you look at it from a bit-per-volume standpoint.
Looking at you Stargate SG1!
Looking at you Assassins Creed!
Post by: i2amroy on July 27, 2012, 06:42:22 pm
2. Why are we using those fragile prop engines again?2)Hover capability probably, though you think they would have at least created some sort of jet hover vehicle that could work almost as well as the props did.
3. The entire Na'Vi battle strategy
3)Agreed.
The real question is what happens in 7 years when Earth finds out that some alien species "Killing Human Beings! News at 10". Factoring in the few years to get the word around and the population motivated enough, and then the return trip including the further acceleration of space travel technology during this time period, I figure the Na'vi have anywhere from 15-20 years before the full might of Earth's military descend upon them and wipes them out, and then we just take all of the unobtanium anyways.
I'm perfectly fine with the idea of genetic memory in Assassin's Creed. I see no reason to whine about how impossible it is. Virtually every super high tech thing in sci-fi games and movies can't work, otherwise they'd exist today and be science fact. Faster than light travel anyone? Lightsabers? Laser guns? Hovercraft that are able to go faster than land vehicles?1)Lightsabers are actually possible at the current time through use of ionized plasma/magnetic fields. Of course you would need to be hooked up to a large generator to power the dang thing, and you probably couldn't fight with them do to the magnetic fields interfering with each other and you losing plasma containment.
2)Laser guns fall in a similar category of "possible, but not practical". Currently the U.S. is working on a type of aircraft mounted laser that could deal substantial damage through use of a double pulse (the first ionizes the air to prevent refraction, then the second actually damages the target), but it's highly experimental currently and very prone to overheating if you fire more then one double-shot in a short period. So laser tanks are a much more probable thing then laser handguns.
3)Hovercraft can beat some land vehicles over certain types of terrain (namely swamp, ice, and sand), but generally at the point when a hover vehicle reaches speeds higher then those of a land based one we tend to call it an aircraft.
4)Faster then light hyperspace like in Star Wars? Not possible. Faster then light like found in Star Trek is theoretically possible by cheating the laws of physics though (you aren't actually moving faster then light, your just bending space so every step you take counts as several in normal space). Of course to do so you would need to be able to manipulate negative mass (possible due to the known existence of negative energy, but probably doesn't exist normally), but it's technically possible to do.
A lot of the sci-fi stuff out there isn't impossible, or even improbable, it just isn't practical. Even the "sci-fi stuff" that we can do now most of it would involve being hooked up to a big-ass generator just to power it, making handheld devices not practical; though if somebody ever comes up with a compact "super battery" then there is already a bunch of stuff out there in the sci-fi worlds that would become commonplace.
Dark Knight Rises!Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Lastly on the topic of DNA storage (ignore the first two panel rows):
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sordid on July 27, 2012, 06:50:04 pm
The real question is what happens in 7 years.
Avatar 2, that's what'll happen. ;)
1)Lightsabers are actually possible at the current time through use of ionized plasma/magnetic fields. Of course you would need to be hooked up to a large generator to power the dang thing, and you probably couldn't fight with them do to the magnetic fields interfering with each other and you losing plasma containment.
So they're possible in theory... except they wouldn't work anything like their movie versions. Right. :P
Post by: Sheb on July 27, 2012, 06:51:12 pm
Post by: Itnetlolor on July 27, 2012, 06:53:35 pm
There are several plot holes in Inception which bother me.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I hope that helps.
Spoiler: In case you don't watch Bleach, this is what I'm talking about. (click to show/hide)
Post by: Scelly9 on July 27, 2012, 06:54:49 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 27, 2012, 06:56:19 pm
The entire biology doesn't make much sense. Not even going to try and defend that.A high gravity world of carbon based life forms, and not a single snake to be seen.
WHY AREN'T THEY ALL SNAKES?!!
As for the Dark Knight... Not even going to go there. They might as well have called the fusion bomb a magic bomb or something. I wouldn't be surprised if Christopher Nolan jumped out of the screen during the end, slapped everyone in the audience with a fish and said, JUST KIDDING! IT WAZ BATMAN'S CLONE THAT DROVE THE BAT!
Post by: Sheb on July 27, 2012, 07:01:57 pm
Post by: i2amroy on July 27, 2012, 07:05:05 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 27, 2012, 07:08:55 pm
Best not to think too long on it.
Post by: Silfurdreki on July 27, 2012, 08:12:53 pm
Also, why are the Na'vi the only vertebrate that don't have a 6-legged body plan?The Ikran are fourlimbed to.
The entire biology doesn't make much sense. Not even going to try and defend that.
Edit: Well technically it's possible, it's just that the chance is undescribely small. I mean, the chance of their being live near alpha centauri is already astronomically small, and then we're talking about microbiological live.
Indeed, alpha centauri is a binary star, with both stars being close to the sun's size while orbiting each other as close as 11 AU (and at most 35 AU) at some point of their orbits. That's almost equivalent to the solar system having a second sun migrating between Saturn and Neptune every 80 years. Not the best place to form stable planetary systems.
Note: There's some equation which was solved by some smart scientists and a lot of guessing which suggests that there are about 20 intelligent alien civilazations in the universe.
The Drake Equation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake%27s_equation). It's less of an equation that you actually solve, and more of an equation in which you guesstimate each term and then come up with an almost completely made up answer. We have better guesses for some terms than others. We know R* pretty well, for example, while we have vague guesses at best for fl through L.
Sorry, the astronomy nerd in me took over, back on topic.
Something that always annoys me is when characters with the ability to fly (or otherwise move up and down in space) never use it to go above some arbitrary plane. For example, in The Fifth Element where the border to human space is marked by a line of blinking buoys in space. There's also the amazing blockade of Naboo in The Phantom Menace, wherein the trade federation blockades an entire planet using a ring of ships at the equator.
Post by: Sordid on July 27, 2012, 09:08:08 pm
There's also the amazing blockade of Naboo in The Phantom Menace, wherein the trade federation blockades an entire planet using a ring of ships at the equator.
Let's just ignore the prequels, shall we? Otherwise this thread will be seven hundred pages long before we're done listing all that's wrong with them.
Post by: MrWiggles on July 27, 2012, 09:33:39 pm
Post by: Euld on July 28, 2012, 12:20:24 am
O <-- The pointI'm perfectly fine with the idea of genetic memory in Assassin's Creed. I see no reason to whine about how impossible it is. Virtually every super high tech thing in sci-fi games and movies can't work, otherwise they'd exist today and be science fact. Faster than light travel anyone? Lightsabers? Laser guns? Hovercraft that are able to go faster than land vehicles?1)Lightsabers are actually possible at the current time through use of ionized plasma/magnetic fields. Of course you would need to be hooked up to a large generator to power the dang thing, and you probably couldn't fight with them do to the magnetic fields interfering with each other and you losing plasma containment.
2)Laser guns fall in a similar category of "possible, but not practical". Currently the U.S. is working on a type of aircraft mounted laser that could deal substantial damage through use of a double pulse (the first ionizes the air to prevent refraction, then the second actually damages the target), but it's highly experimental currently and very prone to overheating if you fire more then one double-shot in a short period. So laser tanks are a much more probable thing then laser handguns.
3)Hovercraft can beat some land vehicles over certain types of terrain (namely swamp, ice, and sand), but generally at the point when a hover vehicle reaches speeds higher then those of a land based one we tend to call it an aircraft.
4)Faster then light hyperspace like in Star Wars? Not possible. Faster then light like found in Star Trek is theoretically possible by cheating the laws of physics though (you aren't actually moving faster then light, your just bending space so every step you take counts as several in normal space). Of course to do so you would need to be able to manipulate negative mass (possible due to the known existence of negative energy, but probably doesn't exist normally), but it's technically possible to do.
A lot of the sci-fi stuff out there isn't impossible, or even improbable, it just isn't practical. Even the "sci-fi stuff" that we can do now most of it would involve being hooked up to a big-ass generator just to power it, making handheld devices not practical; though if somebody ever comes up with a compact "super battery" then there is already a bunch of stuff out there in the sci-fi worlds that would become commonplace.
Lastly on the topic of DNA storage (ignore the first two panel rows):Spoiler (click to show/hide)
<------ Here's you missing it :P
I was trying to say that super advanced tech (or in this case, tech that isn't very practical) doesn't constitute a plot hole. Sure I can understand when a movie or game really pushes it (ME3 ending space magic anyone?) but seriously, the Assassin's creed DNA memory storage doesn't push it that much.
Post by: Sensei on July 28, 2012, 01:35:49 am
As for the planetary blockade being in the shape of a ring... well I'm not actually watching that movie again the see how egregious the visual is, but you can probably just imagine that they had ships evenly spaced around the planet so that you can't pass through without coming in somebody's weapon range.
Post by: Lectorog on July 28, 2012, 01:40:50 am
It bugs me when something seems totally impossible... except when it's addressed as part of the premise, which is pretty much the case with Assassin's Creed.I like to pretend it's in an alternate universe where genetic memory exists. That concept seems more possible than giant orders of Assassins and Templars engaged in a centuries-long war, the Templars taking over government positions and the Assassins assassinating them. Historical fiction is still fiction.
Post by: kaijyuu on July 28, 2012, 01:46:26 am
I don't care if they make up wacky things for the premise. Genetic memory is a-ok to me. Just like warp drives in star trek, or magic in any fantasy setting. I only care if they break their own rules, or introduce a wacky impossible thing at a bad time, like the climax (deus ex machina, ahoy).
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 28, 2012, 01:53:39 am
Ah. Then that leaves the question of why their bones are so dense.Evolution doing strange and magically coming up with natural carbon fiber. 0.8 G is not enough to support such huge fauna.
Best not to think too long on it.
I was expecting the whole gigantism to be caused by a hightened oxygen level, but apparently it's the same as on Earth. Would have explained the breathing system and such though.
2. But they have hovering Jet engines, The Valkyrie uses them. The only reason I could come up with is that props tend to be more resilient to small debris. Explains why they can land in the jungle whitout problems.2. Why are we using those fragile prop engines again?2)Hover capability probably, though you think they would have at least created some sort of jet hover vehicle that could work almost as well as the props did.
3. The entire Na'Vi battle strategy
3)Agreed.
The real question is what happens in 7 years when Earth finds out that some alien species "Killing Human Beings! News at 10". Factoring in the few years to get the word around and the population motivated enough, and then the return trip including the further acceleration of space travel technology during this time period, I figure the Na'vi have anywhere from 15-20 years before the full might of Earth's military descend upon them and wipes them out, and then we just take all of the unobtanium anyways.
Earth would find out much sooner. Both the ISV and Hell's gate have quantum communitcator devices. Instant communications but only 3 bit/hour. The RDA did have serious PR problems before though, so I don't know what the results 'll be. However, there are only 12 ISV's of which multiple are on their way, and whitout unobtanium they can't build more. So minimum 12 years before all ISV's are back(Assuming they come back, they need to be resuplied at Pandora(Avatar 2 ?)). Then 6 years before they arrive with the military at Pandora. Another 12 years before the first mining gear can arrive, and the another 6 years before the first unobtanium arrives on Earth. ( 36 years, assuming the ISV's fly constantly whitout pausing in orbit). I dunno if the RDA has enough financial support to survive that.
After all, unobtanium isn't needed for human survival. It's useful in fusion reactors, fancy maglevs and spaceships.
[/quote]
Post by: Sordid on July 28, 2012, 02:54:52 am
As for the planetary blockade being in the shape of a ring... well I'm not actually watching that movie again the see how egregious the visual is, but you can probably just imagine that they had ships evenly spaced around the planet so that you can't pass through without coming in somebody's weapon range.That would require putting the ships in a spherical arrangement, not a ring.
Post by: Neonivek on July 28, 2012, 03:20:20 am
We'll accept impossible things, but not improbable things!
I don't care if they make up wacky things for the premise. Genetic memory is a-ok to me. Just like warp drives in star trek, or magic in any fantasy setting. I only care if they break their own rules, or introduce a wacky impossible thing at a bad time, like the climax (deus ex machina, ahoy).
Probably the most blantant Deus Ex Machina I have ever seen in a videogame is in Soul Calibur 5 when:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It would be more nit picking except the story is pretty dismal and cannot be ruined further. I just listed it because I don't think any recent game or heck movie could compete with that
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 28, 2012, 03:26:53 am
Post by: miauw62 on July 28, 2012, 05:54:50 am
Usually not to the point where the movie is ruined, but it always annoys me.
For example, XXX: state of the union.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 28, 2012, 05:59:49 am
For example, XXX: state of the union.Dude, he must know LinuxSpoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: kaijyuu on July 28, 2012, 06:00:47 am
Post by: scriver on July 28, 2012, 06:25:55 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 28, 2012, 06:38:01 am
Every zombie movie ever. Why wouldn't they eat other zombies. Especially (the otherwise brilliant) 28 Days Later. It makes absolutely no sense that those "infected with rage" wouldn't attack each other as well.It all depends on what type of zombie you get.
1. Voodoo/ magic zombies/ rising corpses : magic, enough said
2. Technically living zombie: In that case it depends on the type of infection. A virus will most likely not care about those it infected, but a parasite will try to keep them alive. In that case it might make sense for the zombies to emit some kind of pheromone that keeps others from attacking them. Then again, that would make the development of an anti zombie spray rather easy
Post by: Derekristow on July 28, 2012, 06:40:30 am
Edit: Semi-ninja'd.
Post by: kaijyuu on July 28, 2012, 06:51:56 am
Post by: MorleyDev on July 28, 2012, 06:54:44 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Flare on July 28, 2012, 06:56:01 am
I get irked whenever a sci-fi makes reference to genetic memory. I know its sci-fi and I know I'm not supposed to think too hard about it, but for some reason the idea of storing all the information in your brain inside your DNA really bothers me.
Looking at you Stargate SG1!
Looking at you Assassins Creed!
Did Battlestar Galatica do this too?
Avatar has it's flaws, but I don't consider not going genocidal one of them. The humans aren't evil or something, they just prefer profits
Yeah, I got this from the humans too. For example, after the battle they realized what they had done and left the planet in peace even though they could have likely continued or called in more people.
Every zombie movie ever. Why wouldn't they eat other zombies. Especially (the otherwise brilliant) 28 Days Later. It makes absolutely no sense that those "infected with rage" wouldn't attack each other as well.
That's the least of my problems with zombies, mine being why in every zombie moving it's not explained why the military would utterly fail at killing the equivalent of small angry bears.
Post by: kaijyuu on July 28, 2012, 06:57:01 am
The Dark Knight RisesHey, just because YOUR phone sucks... ;DSpoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MorleyDev on July 28, 2012, 07:02:53 am
That's the least of my problems with zombies, mine being why in every zombie moving it's not explained why the military would utterly fail at killing the equivalent of small angry bears.
Usually justified by numbers, not being trained to shoot at the head (suppressive fire doesn't work on a zombie), lack of readiness or willingness to accept that the dead are coming back to life allowing zombie population to grow too quickly and that most of the zombies are in the cities where it's a lot easier to get swarmed.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 28, 2012, 07:08:28 am
Mobile phone towers do not work that way!Maybe it was a sattelite phone? I don't know, haven't watched the movies.That's the least of my problems with zombies, mine being why in every zombie moving it's not explained why the military would utterly fail at killing the equivalent of small angry bears.
Usually justified by numbers, not being trained to shoot at the head (suppressive fire doesn't work on a zombie), lack of readiness or willingness to accept that the dead are coming back to life allowing zombie population to grow too quickly and that most of the zombies are in the cities where it's a lot easier to get swarmed.
Also, the military and all other instances do have plans for a zombie apocalypse. It makes for a good brainstorming exercice.
As for other complains, films where the entire plan of the military comes down to this.
Shoot it with handguns
Did it work:
Y: Good job, mission accomplished. Surely it could not have survived
N: Drop the nukes
Post by: Derekristow on July 28, 2012, 07:18:15 am
Maybe it was a sattelite phone? I don't know, haven't watched the movies.It was working off of cell phones towers. To avoid giving anything away, they left where they were because the ground line internet connection had already been cut, and they knew the local cell tower would be taken down as well.
As for the connection, the program apparently took 8 minutes to run, which seems like an inordinate amount of time for something like that to take. No personal experience, of course, but the unsteady connection could have been accounted for with that time pretty easily.
Post by: NobodyPro on July 28, 2012, 07:41:59 am
Start: Mediocre thriller with mild supernatural elements.
End:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: miauw62 on July 28, 2012, 08:03:26 am
Post by: Flare on July 28, 2012, 09:03:09 am
Mobile phone towers do not work that way!That's the least of my problems with zombies, mine being why in every zombie moving it's not explained why the military would utterly fail at killing the equivalent of small angry bears.
Usually justified by numbers, not being trained to shoot at the head (suppressive fire doesn't work on a zombie), lack of readiness or willingness to accept that the dead are coming back to life allowing zombie population to grow too quickly and that most of the zombies are in the cities where it's a lot easier to get swarmed.
Even if people have never heard of zombies before, I don't think it would take all that long for people to find out about shooting them in the head and that this is some sort of infection. Maybe a large city at most would fall, but beyond that the range of artillery and even simple rifles tends to make quick work of zombies. Clearing out the city would probably be as easy as putting some bait out and letting these things that don't seem to exhibit the caution some animals show come and get mowed down.
Post by: kaijyuu on July 28, 2012, 09:05:45 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 28, 2012, 09:11:16 am
However, everything about zombies suggests them to be caused by a parasite rather then a virus. link (http://www.inkpunks.com/2012/05/23/putting-the-science-in-zombie-apocalypse/)
Post by: Sheb on July 28, 2012, 09:29:25 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 28, 2012, 09:44:03 am
Which is why a real zombie outbreak would start in some poor, populous African country.Then again, those don't have much of international traffic, and not much intercountry traffic either. If the virus has any kind of incubation time, it could spread much faster from Europa or another civilized nation.
Also, with a zombie virus most likely of human origin, they will most likely be dumped onto place of interest. Therefore, not in Africa.
Post by: Sheb on July 28, 2012, 09:48:39 am
And Africa got an history of coming up with diseases, so it could happens.
Post by: Jopax on July 28, 2012, 09:52:18 am
Even then, it could be more-less easily contained after the inital shock.
Plus I never could get as you guys pointed out, why do the zombies choose to only zombify certain people and eat the others.
Post by: miauw62 on July 28, 2012, 09:55:29 am
Post by: Derekristow on July 28, 2012, 10:01:45 am
If it's made by us, it would appear in as many places as possible simultaneously. Zombies always gain strength through forming a horde, the initial outbreak would best follow the same approach. In most other cases, the single outbreak would be quickly contained due to the obvious signs infection brings. Plus, somewhat ironically, the population would probably have a high awareness of what zombies are and how to fight or evade them.Which is why a real zombie outbreak would start in some poor, populous African country.Then again, those don't have much of international traffic, and not much intercountry traffic either. If the virus has any kind of incubation time, it could spread much faster from Europa or another civilized nation.
Also, with a zombie virus most likely of human origin, they will most likely be dumped onto place of interest. Therefore, not in Africa.
Plus I never could get as you guys pointed out, why do the zombies choose to only zombify certain people and eat the others.I'd imagine that in the early days of the outbreak there would be less people getting trapped and swarmed by them. Most media only shows the period of time where there are enough zombies to mob and outright kill the remaining survivors.
Post by: Sheb on July 28, 2012, 10:08:05 am
Post by: Urist Imiknorris on July 28, 2012, 10:11:33 am
Plus I never could get as you guys pointed out, why do the zombies choose to only zombify certain people and eat the others.
Zombify the athletic/strong ones (who would get victims more easily), consume the rest?
Those are much more easily monitored. If an outbreak happens, we won't let them in, but you'll have even more Africans trying to break in.I think the point is that with a sufficient latency period the zombies are merely a formality. The infection is already here.
Post by: miauw62 on July 28, 2012, 10:13:03 am
Post by: Sheb on July 28, 2012, 11:16:52 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 28, 2012, 12:03:54 pm
Post by: TallAsAHouseDwarf on July 28, 2012, 12:57:09 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: lemon10 on July 28, 2012, 01:11:05 pm
Post by: kaijyuu on July 28, 2012, 01:15:14 pm
Post by: Jopax on July 28, 2012, 01:25:17 pm
Yay~
Post by: TallAsAHouseDwarf on July 28, 2012, 02:05:34 pm
Post by: Derekristow on July 28, 2012, 02:14:47 pm
I have mixed feelings about this new Batman movie.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
.Post by: Neonivek on July 28, 2012, 05:05:22 pm
Quote
I'm slightly surprised it managed to the get PG-13 rather than R
Ohh that is because the ratings system is corrupt... No I am not even joking.
Note: I don't mean any bribing happened, they are just allowed to increase or decrease the rating according to how much they like the movie.
Post by: Neyvn on July 28, 2012, 05:24:26 pm
Which is why a real zombie outbreak would start in some poor, populous African country.Actually I think there is a Webcomic out there that uses that basis to represent how the outbreak happens... Can't remember the name, lost the bookmark...
Basically it starts in a small African town, which gets sectioned off by the African Military who attempts to wipe out the infection, fails, calls in American backup, which also fails due to not knowing whats been going on inside the infected zone cause, hey, what African Army General tells anyone anything when you look at the media, all America knew was that it was a problem that the local militants couldn't handle and thus stuck their nose into it on request. They fuck up, the infection starts covering Africa, spreads via both land and air as the infected are Transported back to the States, Cause you know some stupid Egghead wants a living sample to study, which also breaks out cause no one knows how to truly handle something that can resist general pain and normal human restraints cause heck they still think its a "rage induced action" and they are still living people, so no head shots there. Which then leads to a general break down as the airport which the plane lands at when the zed breaks free and infects the crew and workers, which drains into a currently running airport infecting hundreds if not thousands, which then goes on into the city, leading to a sudden and rapid growth due to how commuters and general civil reaction time handles a large group of undead zeds charging at you. This leads to small forces being over run, small barracks deeply under prepared and thus over run before any information can get out that the area is becoming infected in the large standings that it is, the Military cocksup and thinks its something small and easily wiped out like normal and thus under prepares their troops who get swarmed, leading to a whole country being crippled. Meanwhile the Zeds have crossed into Europe and everything is hitting the fan...
Meanwhile in Madagascar...
Post by: Jopax on July 28, 2012, 05:25:51 pm
Anyways, the most eggregious (damn that word) exampl of the 13 rating is when
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: kaenneth on July 28, 2012, 05:26:53 pm
Plus I never could get as you guys pointed out, why do the zombies choose to only zombify certain people and eat the others.
Zombify the athletic/strong ones (who would get victims more easily), consume the rest?
Like a shark; sharks generally don't eat people, they give a little nip, then let go, because most of us don't have the body fat level of a seal.
So, fattys get eaten, fit get zombified, because this people get bitten a couple times, then released.
Post by: Neyvn on July 28, 2012, 05:28:44 pm
not shamblers, those are way too easy to outrun.A Brisk Walk would outpace a Shambler... I mean, you just need to speed up a little more then normal, something lower then a jog and you would be ok...
Post by: MorleyDev on July 28, 2012, 07:57:45 pm
I think 28 weeks later got it nicely, how it would work, the only possible way for it to spread effectively would include running zombies, not shamblers, those are way too easy to outrun.
That or the Romero rules where *everybody* who dies becomes a zombie. Then the war never stops and the enemy has infinite resources so the idea humanity would be completely *fucked* is more plausible...
Post by: Sheb on July 28, 2012, 08:21:15 pm
Post by: Vattic on July 28, 2012, 08:45:46 pm
I'm related to a military nerd, mostly the Vietnam war. Rather than his knowledge ruining films he seems to enjoy picking them apart. Vehicles, uniforms, and other equipment are the main complaints.
I get irked whenever a sci-fi makes reference to genetic memory. I know its sci-fi and I know I'm not supposed to think too hard about it, but for some reason the idea of storing all the information in your brain inside your DNA really bothers me.The film that pushes the limits on this hardest in my eyes is Alien Resurrection. It also has something else that bugged me.
Looking at you Stargate SG1!
Looking at you Assassins Creed!
Spoiler: DNA stuff (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: other thing (click to show/hide)
Post by: JoshuaFH on July 29, 2012, 12:13:29 am
Note that viruses aren't above manipulating you as well. The flu makes you extra sociable, for example.
I want to backtrack a couple pages for this. Where did you read this? This is the first time I've heard of the flu making you sociable.
Post by: kaijyuu on July 29, 2012, 12:18:58 am
EDIT: Can not find it. Alas.
I do remember the context, though. And probably not cracked, now that I think about it. It was about how some diseases aid in their propagation by affecting your behavior. Beyond the flu, the most obvious virus that makes you do stuff would be rabies; it doesn't make you aggressive out of pure happenstance.
Post by: Kaleb702 Games on July 29, 2012, 12:45:35 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 29, 2012, 01:21:26 am
There are various towns across the world, mostly along the tropics where humans regularly have to come into contact with animals, namely hunting. When things get cut and blood transmission or something else occurs, pathogens can sometimes cross species - and learn how to invade human hosts. From there, they spread and evolve further.Which is why a real zombie outbreak would start in some poor, populous African country.Actually I think there is a Webcomic out there that uses that basis to represent how the outbreak happens... Can't remember the name, lost the bookmark...
Basically it starts in a small African town...
Knowing that, there are also conveniently placed centers which are always on the look for possibilities of diseases crossing species. This hasn't failed us yet, so I don't see why it would fail us in the event of a zombehpokalips. It'd be like the movie doomsday, except Africa edition.
Spoiler: other thing (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on July 29, 2012, 01:38:46 am
Quote
I don't see why it would fail us in the event of a zombehpokalips
It tends to involve a sudden and unpredictable leap.
We know right now what surprise viruses will come about (Bacteria a little less so but they are less a deal in this case).
The Zombiepokalips is a virus completely unknown suddenly out of no where infecting huge amounts of people, with excellent infection ability, and with almost absolute fatality rates.
Mind you Zombie-ism actually may be too deadly to really cause wise spread damage unless it can coast on the prevailing winds like some viruses.
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 29, 2012, 01:45:12 am
From guys trained to observe sudden leaps in species. Unpredictable as well, except in geography. That much is predictable. What would be more likely would be somewhere where they're not observing, say... A remote island. Get a significant portion of a bird population infected, have them go on a migration with some zombehbrainzdisease inubating inside them while they fly over to some countries with dense populations, and if the disease ever crossed species - zombehopoculkayepsszzQuoteI don't see why it would fail us in the event of a zombehpokalips
It tends to involve a sudden and unpredictable leap.
And that's not likely at all :|
The easiest cause of zombhuporklypse explainable would be some rabies-like disease going airborne. But I'd still say we'd notice and be able to limit it at it's first sight.
Post by: lemon10 on July 29, 2012, 01:58:37 am
Resident evil/left 4 dead super zombies/unique zombies And/OR 50%+ infection and mortality rate (at the very minimum) from the initial disease, as well as near simultaneous effects zombie events taking place.
Zombieism has about a 0% chance of ever happening, maybe some laboratory designed virus intended to cause zombieism might be able to cause it (once we get much better at designing diseases of course), but I doubt it.From guys trained to observe sudden leaps in species. Unpredictable as well, except in geography. That much is predictable. What would be more likely would be somewhere where they're not observing, say... A remote island. Get a significant portion of a bird population infected, have them go on a migration with some zombehbrainzdisease inubating inside them while they fly over to some countries with dense populations, and if the disease ever crossed species - zombehopoculkayepsszzQuoteI don't see why it would fail us in the event of a zombehpokalips
It tends to involve a sudden and unpredictable leap.
And that's not likely at all :|
The easiest cause of zombhuporklypse explainable would be some rabies-like disease going airborne. But I'd still say we'd notice and be able to limit it at it's first sight.
Post by: Frumple on July 29, 2012, 02:07:53 am
Zombocalypse. Get it right!
It is the one true fusion of zombie and apocalypse. Zompocalypse is close to acceptable, though obviously incorrect. All other variations are anathema. *fistshake*
Anyway, nitpicks, yeah. I've found as time passes and the distance between watched movies grow, I become increasingly annoyed by movies set in the future that have wildly disparate -- and in some cases, outright regressed (for no mentioned reason) -- technology and, in some ways worse, methodologies.
Avatar in particular annoyed me, though mostly because it's just the most recent I've watched. Try to tell me that material science won't progress to the point we have clear materials capable of taking a flipping arrow by the time we have space travel and I will (metaphorically) hit you in the face with the hurricane propelled brick we already have bouncing off windows, never mind mil grade shit. And that's just the bloody start of it.
I want to strangle the whole pusedo-military thing they had going. One, maybe two, kinetic kill vehicles of the proper type and that whole damn tree would have been splinters, with zero chance of retaliation. Rocks goddamn fall, every space elf dies. Warble warble. Whole bloody thing was done just pathetically bad. Our corporations are massively better than that at native exploitation now (and have been for centuries! We're not getting worse at it!), never mind whatever (even more) dystopian nightmare future!corps are likely to be.
Pretty but stupid does not a good movie make.
Post by: Neonivek on July 29, 2012, 02:10:52 am
Which of course only would add the other plot hole of "Why didn't they just use the vehicle with plating strong enough to deflect large arrows made out of Strongtanium?"
"From guys trained to observe sudden leaps in species. Unpredictable as well"
We are talking about a virus that doesn't exist in nature having a infection rate, infection vectors, and lethality at insane levels comming perfectly out of the blue. As in they don't even see it in nature (or worse they do... in some cases the zombie virus infects all animals as well).
It is something that someone quite well described as "impossible". So tell me, have they trained for the impossible?
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 29, 2012, 02:17:37 am
Avatar in particular annoyed me, though mostly because it's just the most recent I've watched. Try to tell me that material science won't progress to the point we have clear materials capable of taking a flipping arrow by the time we have space travel and I will (metaphorically) hit you in the face with the hurricane propelled brick we already have bouncing off windows, never mind mil grade shit. And that's just the bloody start of it.Didn't the arrows in avatar bounce right off of the gunships's windows?
Post by: Frumple on July 29, 2012, 02:20:50 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 02:22:51 am
Avatar in particular annoyed me, though mostly because it's just the most recent I've watched. Try to tell me that material science won't progress to the point we have clear materials capable of taking a flipping arrow by the time we have space travel and I will (metaphorically) hit you in the face with the hurricane propelled brick we already have bouncing off windows, never mind mil grade shit. And that's just the bloody start of it.1. Jup, nice little plothole we got there. I mean, the cockpits aren't even bulletproof or something.
I want to strangle the whole pusedo-military thing they had going. One, maybe two, kinetic kill vehicles of the proper type and that whole damn tree would have been splinters, with zero chance of retaliation. Rocks goddamn fall, every space elf dies. Warble warble. Whole bloody thing was done just pathetically bad. Our corporations are massively better than that at native exploitation now (and have been for centuries! We're not getting worse at it!), never mind whatever (even more) dystopian nightmare future!corps are likely to be.
Pretty but stupid does not a good movie make.
2. Third time I'm saying this. THE RDA IS NOT EVIL. They don't want to kill the Na Vi, never wanted too. That's why they used the gas grenades, and allowed the Na'vi to be warned. Besides, the tree was sitting on an unobtanium deposit (which is why they wanted to destroy it in the first place) and unobtanium is some sort of very complicated compound. A significant mass drop could have destroyed the deposit.
They punch through later. During the tree fight they punch of, which can be explained by the impact angle. Later however, they punch through due to a near perpendicular angle.Avatar in particular annoyed me, though mostly because it's just the most recent I've watched. Try to tell me that material science won't progress to the point we have clear materials capable of taking a flipping arrow by the time we have space travel and I will (metaphorically) hit you in the face with the hurricane propelled brick we already have bouncing off windows, never mind mil grade shit. And that's just the bloody start of it.Didn't the arrows in avatar bounce right off of the gunships's windows?
The exosuit thing. We'll not say anything about the exosuit beyond that. I love me my giant robots and suchlike, but am terribly aware just how terrible they are as a practical weapons platform.They were never intended as one. Not completly intended anyway. They can be used for civilian duties too.
Post by: kaijyuu on July 29, 2012, 02:35:32 am
Genocide and destruction wasn't their goal, no, but they considered it an acceptable cost. Preeeety sure that falls under evil.
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 29, 2012, 02:37:30 am
Yeah in the earlier scenes the mechs are all seen doing nothing but lift crates. I'd imagine a proper spehss military would've fielded something with much more dakka.The exosuit thing. We'll not say anything about the exosuit beyond that. I love me my giant robots and suchlike, but am terribly aware just how terrible they are as a practical weapons platform.They were never intended as one. Not completly intended anyway. They can be used for civilian duties too.
Also I just noticed : All of the fighting in the jungles ever done was done in thick foliage. Who forgot the flamethrowers? :p
Post by: MrWiggles on July 29, 2012, 02:42:49 am
And why does everyone assume the spaceship that brought them there is also military and loaded with guns? And even if it was, why would it be loaded with nukes? I think these suppose plot holes, are just inventing plot holes.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 02:45:01 am
They are shown for exactly 5 seconds. I assume they are just to expensive to use or something. It's not like the mechs or even the gunships seem to have problems navigating the foliage.Yeah in the earlier scenes the mechs are all seen doing nothing but lift crates. I'd imagine a proper spehss military would've fielded something with much more dakka.The exosuit thing. We'll not say anything about the exosuit beyond that. I love me my giant robots and suchlike, but am terribly aware just how terrible they are as a practical weapons platform.They were never intended as one. Not completly intended anyway. They can be used for civilian duties too.
Also I just noticed : All of the fighting in the jungles ever done was done in thick foliage. Who forgot the flamethrowers? :p
Not evil? While amorality != immorality, it's hard to argue that the former can't be evil.Not evil in the sense that everyone thinks them to be. They got no reasons to genocide the Na'Vi , and therefore they don't.
Genocide and destruction wasn't their goal, no, but they considered it an acceptable cost. Preeeety sure that falls under evil.
Post by: Frumple on July 29, 2012, 03:02:26 am
2. Third time I'm saying this. THE RDA IS NOT EVIL. They don't want to kill the Na Vi, never wanted too. That's why they used the gas grenades, and allowed the Na'vi to be warned. Besides, the tree was sitting on an unobtanium deposit (which is why they wanted to destroy it in the first place) and unobtanium is some sort of very complicated compound. A significant mass drop could have destroyed the deposit.Who said anything about evil? S'got nothing to do with morality, has to do with apparently forgetting vast swaths of our history. Poorly done everything, apparently throwing out centuries of highly efficient methods of extorting materials from native populations, and when they actually do decide to go to violence, they do it in a way approaching the least effective method possible. S'vaguely infuriating, y'know?
I mean, hell m'fellow. We can make clones of them. Wide area gas based (probably contact) tranquilizer, send in drones to collect the bodies and airlift them to other side of the continent. Done and done (and probably ridiculously more cost effective than those silly avatar things, or even the incendiaries they tried to resort to.). They get pissed and march back across and try and stop you, you just do it again. That's just one of at least a dozen ways that would have been more effective than trying to drop incendiaries from within range of retaliation. This isn't highly advanced military strategy! I've watched preteens come up with equivalent strategy without prompting!
I just... when a movie seems to be trying to take itself seriously and a dozen little things is demonstrating that the antagonist (or protagonist, really.) is just massively incompetent... I'unno. Maybe it's not so much nitpick as just a crappy writer or something?
I think you all keep assuming that Pandora Mining Group, was a military first operation and not a military protected operation. With the overly dangerous flora and fauna the operation needed a fair amount of protect. They weren't armed for a war in the jungle.Mostly my problem is that it shouldn't have been a war in the jungle. The tech disparity, just with the crap they showed, never mind anything hidden aware, should have made the conflict utterly trivial if the human side wasn't being massively brain dead about it.
Quote
And why does everyone assume the spaceship that brought them there is also military and loaded with guns? And even if it was, why would it be loaded with nukes? I think these suppose plot holes, are just inventing plot holes.Who said anything about nukes? Drop a small rock on them. If they've got interstellar space travel, they've got the tech and the knowhow to dig up a rock of sufficient size and pinpoint drop it on points of resistance (we're bloody close to having it now). Air superiority is near absolute superiority, and orbital superiority is a notch above that. You just use a small enough rock it won't damage the ore deposits. Hell, you don't even have to drop from orbit! Just go higher than the oversized flying lizards can and dump an ore load's worth of rock on them or something. Problem solved!
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 29, 2012, 03:03:58 am
Not evil? While amorality != immorality, it's hard to argue that the former can't be evil.You want to talk about genocide? Humanity in Avatar needs unobtainium for FTL, which is in turn used to transport resources and Pandoran biology back to Earth, which is in turn keeping the planet and the people on it from collapsing into apocalyptic chaos due a lack of resources and biological diversity. The Na'vi, on the other hand, completely refuse to cooperate and randomly decided to start killing the RDA personnel on sight from the advice of their God-Emperor-Tree-Thing. The actions they take present an existential threat to humanity. They would have gotten off lucky being bombed into retreat, and thanks to traitor extraordinaire Jake Sully everyone on Earth is doomed.
Genocide and destruction wasn't their goal, no, but they considered it an acceptable cost. Preeeety sure that falls under evil.
Colonel Quartich is the true hero of Avatar and the attempted savior of all humankind, betrayed at the darkest hour by his most trusted follower.
Post by: kaijyuu on July 29, 2012, 03:09:45 am
Remember the wise old shaman lady saying they can't teach someone who's "cup is already full"? If humanity's screwed, they screwed themselves over, and there's nothing the blue people could've done to change that.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 03:10:37 am
Not evil? While amorality != immorality, it's hard to argue that the former can't be evil.You want to talk about genocide? Humanity in Avatar needs unobtainium for FTL, which is in turn used to transport resources and Pandoran biology back to Earth, which is in turn keeping the planet and the people on it from collapsing into apocalyptic chaos. The Na'vi, on the other hand, completely refuse to cooperate and randomly decided to start killing the RDA personnel on sight from the advice of their God-Emperor-Tree-Thing. The actions they take present an existential threat to humanity. They would have gotten off lucky being bombed into retreat, and thanks to traitor extraordinary Jake Sully everyone on Earth is doomed.
Genocide and destruction wasn't their goal, no, but they considered it an acceptable cost. Preeeety sure that falls under evil.
Colonel Quartich is the true hero of Avatar and the attempted savior of all humankind, betrayed at the darkest hour by his most trusted follower.
Nope. Backstory tells us otherwise. Unobtanium is needed for FTL, but it is also the only resource brought back to Earth. Bringing back Pandoran biology is
A) Biology fail (No Biochemical barriers)
B) One of the stupidest thing you can do to a weakened ecosystem is bringing in exotic plants. Pandora is on semi Quarantine for that reason.
The backstory(and extended DVD version) tells us that Earth is slowly regaining it's ecosystem thanks to governement (No RDA involved) funded cloning programs. The unobtanium is only needed for energy production (Cheap fusion reactors) and the global maglev network. It is at no point stated and there's no reason to think that unobtanium is needed for human survival. Sure it would make live easier for us on our dying planet, but it isn't needed.
Which brings me to another minor plothole. Does, at any point in the movie, someone attempt to explain to the Na Vi why we're clear cutting the forest ?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 29, 2012, 03:13:11 am
Being that Earth is dying and all, cheap fusion energy and FTL are not luxuries, they are a necessity for the planet's recovery.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 03:20:24 am
The backstory also tells you that the government cloning programs work because of study into Pandoran biology. Where did you think the Avatar Program came from?
Being that Earth is dying and all, cheap fusion energy and FTL are not luxuries, they are a necessity for the planet's recovery.
Where have you read that. The backstory explicitily states that the Avatar amnio tanks are adapted from technology that is widespread on Earth. In fact, the thing also reffers to a whole lot of experiments on mamalian creatures that didn't need to be preformed on the avatar versions.
Fusion technology also works without unobtanium, as is evidenced by the widespread RDA lunar He-3 operation and by the sheer widespreadness of fusion engines*, which predates the discovery of Pandora. It doesn't help that we're not told why the unobtanium is so valuable, and that the wiki's article on unobtanium is blank.
*Even the mining systems run on fusion for example.
As for FTL being needed.
1. FTL doesn't exist in the Avatar verse
2. The only target for the ISV's to go to is Pandora, they ain't going anywhere else, and in fact, can't go anywhere else.
Post by: Neyvn on July 29, 2012, 03:51:58 am
No no no...-snip-
not that webcomic, but still: http://xkcd.com/734/
This one...
http://www.zombiewaffe.com/home/2011/07/11/page-1/
Post by: miauw62 on July 29, 2012, 04:08:24 am
A cracked article, iirc. Lemme see if I can find it.There's also this parasite taht normally alterates between cats and mice, and makes mice attracted to cats so cats can get the parasite again. Can also get to humans, btw.
EDIT: Can not find it. Alas.
I do remember the context, though. And probably not cracked, now that I think about it. It was about how some diseases aid in their propagation by affecting your behavior. Beyond the flu, the most obvious virus that makes you do stuff would be rabies; it doesn't make you aggressive out of pure happenstance.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 04:11:37 am
Toxoplamosis I think.A cracked article, iirc. Lemme see if I can find it.There's also this parasite taht normally alterates between cats and mice, and makes mice attracted to cats so cats can get the parasite again. Can also get to humans, btw.
EDIT: Can not find it. Alas.
I do remember the context, though. And probably not cracked, now that I think about it. It was about how some diseases aid in their propagation by affecting your behavior. Beyond the flu, the most obvious virus that makes you do stuff would be rabies; it doesn't make you aggressive out of pure happenstance.
I might also affect human behaviour, btw.
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 29, 2012, 04:29:28 am
I might also affect human behaviour, btw.If by affect you mean "cause brain damage" yes
Post by: scriver on July 29, 2012, 06:18:28 am
Not evil in the sense that everyone thinks them to be. They got no reasons to genocide the Na'Vi , and therefore they don't.
Maybe not EVIL, but yeah, they're just as evil, or bad or immoral if you prefer, as any other imperialists throughout our history.
Post by: Vattic on July 29, 2012, 06:41:10 am
Spoiler: other thing (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
There is one other thing that bugged me from Alien Resurrection.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Flare on July 29, 2012, 07:29:11 am
And why does everyone assume the spaceship that brought them there is also military and loaded with guns? And even if it was, why would it be loaded with nukes? I think these suppose plot holes, are just inventing plot holes.
If I was the chairman of that corporation, I''d probably load them up with some guns, and put in some share-holder nukes along with it. I mean, if you were going to go to a planet that potentially holds life forms, there might be a chance you need to kill them all. There are many other scenarios where the ship might need to defend itself even without the probability of unknown aliens fighting back. In any case, arming your ships seems like a pretty good idea given how far away from reinforcements the ship will be when it reaches Pandora, you're not exactly conducting a mining operation within the umbrella of any sort of state apparatus.
As for nukes, I would think they would be much more plentiful in an age where FTL travel to other stars is feasible given the power requirements of FTL as well as the substantial danger it poses to earth that dwarfs nukes. The ships probably are carrying a reactor of some sort, if not several in case one fails. The power generation requirements needed to mine out whole mountains are similarly huge, especially when you have so few people around it suggests a great deal of the grunt work would be done by machines, so you probably need a reactor for that too unless you're planning to dig or carry all the fossil fuels for the whole operation.
Post by: MrWillsauce on July 29, 2012, 07:32:00 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: kaijyuu on July 29, 2012, 07:38:12 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 07:45:00 am
The first mission to Pandora was done at great expense, using a 4 km ship. Considering the enormous energy costs involved, there would be no space for redundant features such as weaponry. After that they knew about the Na'vi, and using nukes and orbital weaponry against stone age people seems a bit redundant, doesn't it. Especially when you are having serious PR problems already, and your ship only has a 350 metric tonnes of cargo capacity. (Which isn't a lot on astronomical scales, believe me)
*The RDA was only permitted the right to mine the planet after PETA screwed up their campaign. Turns out using a human with implants as Na' Vi was a bad idea.
Last but not Least:
THERE IS NO FTL TRAVEL IN AVATAR (0.7 c is fast, but not FTL)
The only star they can reach is alpha Centauri, and that only at great expense. All power generation is done by fusion (excepts for the ships main drive, which is an antimatter/matter reactor). Unlike fission, fusion can not be brought to explode. Besides, since fission is barely used anymore, the amount of nuclear weapons would most likely be less, not more. Antimatter/matter reactors being as dangerous as they are, I expect them to be strongly guarded. The deuterium and he 3 required for fusionpower on Pandora are gathered from the gas giant around which the ship flies, using retired shuttles.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 07:52:28 am
Quote
More powerful than most Earth governments. The Resources Development Administration (RDA) has monopoly rights to all products shipped, derived or developed from Pandora and any other off-Earth location. These rights were granted to RDA in perpetuity by the Interplanetary Commerce Administration (ICA), with the stipulation that they abide by a treaty that prohibits weapons of mass destruction and limits military power in space.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 29, 2012, 08:08:20 am
Post by: Flare on July 29, 2012, 08:16:00 am
If I were the secretary of the UN, and a corporation whose fundings exceeds that of several nations, and that employs people such as Lovecraft (Inventor of the Dark dreamer project, which became the avatar project) wanted to design a spaceship with weapon capabilities and equip it with nukes, and send that to an alien planet, of which the only intelligent live lies on stone age levels, I'd sure as hell withdraw that mining license* and dismantle the company if I could.
Though are you factoring in that if the ships like the one seen in the movie exist, and even smaller more mundane ones exist that these, even without and nuke can cause a catastrophe on earth already? It seems to me that if you were to remove their mining license on this charge you'd run up against the precedent already set by having start ships zip around space at fractions of the speed of light. If mining for this material through out space is already wide spread, nuclear reactors are going to be the main stay of these mining operations.
And besides, if nukes do hold that much power in that world, you're probably not going to anger any organization that has them. The lead up to acquiring nuclear weapons might be fraught with embargoes and sanctions, but once you have them and have demonstrated their existence, people tend to leave you alone unless you have a reputation as an asshole.
Quote
The first mission to Pandora was done at great expense, using a 4 km ship. Considering the enormous energy costs involved, there would be no space for redundant features such as weaponry. After that they knew about the Na'vi, and using nukes and orbital weaponry against stone age people seems a bit redundant, doesn't it. Especially when you are having serious PR problems already, and your ship only has a 350 metric tonnes of cargo capacity. (Which isn't a lot on astronomical scales, believe me)
*The RDA was only permitted the right to mine the planet after PETA screwed up their campaign. Turns out using a human with implants as Na' Vi was a bad idea.
Last but not Least:
THERE IS NO FTL TRAVEL IN AVATAR (0.7 c is fast, but not FTL)
This is a bit worse so to speak. There might be some weird physics cheat in an FTL drive that might lessen the impact, but a straight on torch ship has problems that ships with reactionless drives have. Namely that it goes so fast that if it were to collide with earth it would probably crack the crust and kill everything on it. A nuke, and especially a nuke with the power of WWII bombs, aren't going to be on the list of things you need to worry about. Their ship, if it moves this fast, can effectively hold the earth hostage.
They're already beyond the dangers that nukes can pose after they built that ship, the ship effectively doubles as a planet cracker. Shoving a few Hiroshima sized bombs onto it doesn't seem to be that much of an escalation of danger this ship poses to all human life on earth.
As for weight, with their level of technology, a fusion or even a fission bomb can be made quite small I imagine, especially if it's yield is on the civilian level instead of whatever monsters they have in their era. As for their use, they're great for burning down forests, so long as your air burst is high enough off the ground. A sprinkling of a few Little Mans here and there and you're basically can drastically cut back on the logging equipment.
Quote
The only star they can reach is alpha Centauri, and that only at great expense. All power generation is done by fusion (excepts for the ships main drive, which is an antimatter/matter reactor). Unlike fission, fusion can not be brought to explode. Besides, since fission is barely used anymore, the amount of nuclear weapons would most likely be less, not more. Antimatter/matter reactors being as dangerous as they are, I expect them to be strongly guarded. The deuterium and he 3 required for fusionpower on Pandora are gathered from the gas giant around which the ship flies, using retired shuttles.
Fission doesn't explode either :/. It just generates an intense amount of heat in a very short time given a very specific situation. The explosion is from whatever material around the bomb superheating into plasma in an instant and expanding at an indredible rate due to how much heat is released in such a small time frame. A fusion bomb is quite possible. But having read your comment, nukes are once again the least of your worries. The fact that their engine uses antimatter is scary thought given how much power you have concentrated there, and how volatile it is. And so, if you trust a company with something this scary, you can probably trust them with some big bombs when they ask for some.
Post by: Skyrunner on July 29, 2012, 08:33:44 am
Post by: Flare on July 29, 2012, 08:40:28 am
Even at 30 tons or the weight of one of the mechs. Going at 0.7c is fast enough to kill everything on the planet once it hits the atmosphere. For FTL systems like star trek where they fold the space in front of the ship to make each step seem like several it might actually be a more traditional impact given that the universe thinks it's going at a reasonable pace. But when a ship actually physically goes over half the speed of light, having that mass come to a dead stop releases a tremendous amount of energy.
Post by: Sheb on July 29, 2012, 08:44:23 am
Post by: kaijyuu on July 29, 2012, 08:46:29 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 08:50:11 am
There' a difference between ships armed with active weaponry and shuttles that could be used to crash on Earth. Besides, as evidenced by the post above, the RDA was required to sign a contract that they would not use/own any WMD or participate in the militarization of space. This implies they had no WMD's at the moment of signing, and weren't allowed to acquire any later on. Mining for unobtanium is not widespread. There are 12 ISV's, and Pandora is the only confirmed source. All other space travel is implied to be seriously subluminal, considering the giant expenses required in maintaining faster then light speed. The other mines (On the moon and Mars), mine He-3 and some other resources.If I were the secretary of the UN, and a corporation whose fundings exceeds that of several nations, and that employs people such as Lovecraft (Inventor of the Dark dreamer project, which became the avatar project) wanted to design a spaceship with weapon capabilities and equip it with nukes, and send that to an alien planet, of which the only intelligent live lies on stone age levels, I'd sure as hell withdraw that mining license* and dismantle the company if I could.
Though are you factoring in that if the ships like the one seen in the movie exist, and even smaller more mundane ones exist that these, even without and nuke can cause a catastrophe on earth already? It seems to me that if you were to remove their mining license on this charge you'd run up against the precedent already set by having start ships zip around space at fractions of the speed of light. If mining for this material through out space is already wide spread, nuclear reactors are going to be the main stay of these mining operations.
And besides, if nukes do hold that much power in that world, you're probably not going to anger any organization that has them. The lead up to acquiring nuclear weapons might be fraught with embargoes and sanctions, but once you have them and have demonstrated their existence, people tend to leave you alone unless you have a reputation as an asshole.
1. All RDA officials live on Earth. Sure they could hold each mutually hostage, but it would accomplish muchQuoteThe first mission to Pandora was done at great expense, using a 4 km ship. Considering the enormous energy costs involved, there would be no space for redundant features such as weaponry. After that they knew about the Na'vi, and using nukes and orbital weaponry against stone age people seems a bit redundant, doesn't it. Especially when you are having serious PR problems already, and your ship only has a 350 metric tonnes of cargo capacity. (Which isn't a lot on astronomical scales, believe me)
*The RDA was only permitted the right to mine the planet after PETA screwed up their campaign. Turns out using a human with implants as Na' Vi was a bad idea.
Last but not Least:
THERE IS NO FTL TRAVEL IN AVATAR (0.7 c is fast, but not FTL)
This is a bit worse so to speak. There might be some weird physics cheat in an FTL drive that might lessen the impact, but a straight on torch ship has problems that ships with reactionless drives have. Namely that it goes so fast that if it were to collide with earth it would probably crack the crust and kill everything on it. A nuke, and especially a nuke with the power of WWII bombs, aren't going to be on the list of things you need to worry about. Their ship, if it moves this fast, can effectively hold the earth hostage.
They're already beyond the dangers that nukes can pose after they built that ship, the ship effectively doubles as a planet cracker. Shoving a few Hiroshima sized bombs onto it doesn't seem to be that much of an escalation of danger this ship poses to all human life on earth.
As for weight, with their level of technology, a fusion or even a fission bomb can be made quite small I imagine, especially if it's yield is on the civilian level instead of whatever monsters they have in their era. As for their use, they're great for burning down forests, so long as your air burst is high enough off the ground. A sprinkling of a few Little Mans here and there and you're basically can drastically cut back on the logging equipment.
2. Also, using the ship as a weapon would be rather hard.
-The ship requires 6 months to arcelerate
-At those speeds, even a dust particle would blow up the entire ship. It has shields to avoid this, but since the defense systems relies on the first 3 shields being destroyed in the collision, just sending 2 pebble sized objects can destroy it.
-An integral part of the ships arceleration is a giant laser placed somewhere in the solar system. I'm pretty sure this one would be under governement control.
3. They wouldn't have got permission to build the ship without signing the contract. I'm pretty sure they made sure that the RDA wouldn't cheat on them.
4. Fusion only happens at high temperatures/high densities. In order to have a fusion bomb you'd need to use a fission bomb to set it off. As for using them to burn forests, why? The RDA doesn't want to destroy the forests, nor anger the natives, the general public or the United Nations if they don't need too. Over it's thirty year colonization, the RDA has cut maybe just enough forest to justify 3 warheads. (The mine, Hell's gate and Hometree). Nevertheless, they would still need to invest in logging equipment, if only to control the Jungle when it grows back. Blowing it up works the first time, but after that your own material gets in the way.
[/quote]QuoteThe only star they can reach is alpha Centauri, and that only at great expense. All power generation is done by fusion (excepts for the ships main drive, which is an antimatter/matter reactor). Unlike fission, fusion can not be brought to explode. Besides, since fission is barely used anymore, the amount of nuclear weapons would most likely be less, not more. Antimatter/matter reactors being as dangerous as they are, I expect them to be strongly guarded. The deuterium and he 3 required for fusionpower on Pandora are gathered from the gas giant around which the ship flies, using retired shuttles.
Fission doesn't explode either :/. It just generates an intense amount of heat in a very short time given a very specific situation. The explosion is from whatever material around the bomb superheating into plasma in an instant and expanding at an indredible rate due to how much heat is released in such a small time frame. A fusion bomb is quite possible. But having read your comment, nukes are once again the least of your worries. The fact that their engine uses antimatter is scary thought given how much power you have concentrated there, and how volatile it is. And so, if you trust a company with something this scary, you can probably trust them with some big bombs when they ask for some.
Given the danger of anti matter weaponry, it would make sense for the governements of Earth to enforce strict rules and such. Maybe all higher RDA officials are forced to remain on Earth. Maybe there are failsafes build in in the engines. The particle arcelerators that produce the antimatter are most likely heavily guarded and governement controlled too. In the end however, why would the RDA ask for the bombs:
Nuclear weapons
Positive
-Neglible civilian use
-Should the natives somehow revolt and manage to beat our troops using stone age tech, we can nuke them
Negative
-Requires breaking a contract with the effects that all RDA's space bound operations would be cancelled
-Will make the natives revolt, immediatly
-PR death
Really, the costs completly outweight possible benefits
Yeah, so they could just have kinetic killed the tree. Or dug under it.No time, No capable weaponry, no reason.
Now I'm curious if the gas giant Pandora was orbiting could've survived their ship hitting it head on at .7c.
Well, the effects would be similair to one fourth (0.49/2) of the ships weight in matter/antimatter detonating.
Post by: Sheb on July 29, 2012, 08:53:16 am
Also, how do they go back to Earth if they need an Earth-basedlaser to accelerate?
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 08:55:03 am
Dropping a rock doesn't reauire that much time or weaponry.They can arcelerate on their matter/ antimatter reaction too. The laser just allows them to cut costs, as it saves them up to 50% of their fuel requirements
Also, how do they go back to Earth if they need an Earth-basedlaser to accelerate?
Post by: Skyrunner on July 29, 2012, 08:56:37 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 08:57:55 am
Hmm, I don't think calculating it is possible... at least, not with any precision. Wouldn't factors like how the ship crumples, or how the gas dissipates force, or any other myriad of factors make it hard to know?The ship is impacting at 0.7 c. At that speeds it doesn't crumple, it instantly vaporizes into plasma.
Post by: kaijyuu on July 29, 2012, 08:58:23 am
Post by: Sheb on July 29, 2012, 08:58:35 am
Post by: Kagus on July 29, 2012, 09:02:58 am
No no no...
This one...
http://www.zombiewaffe.com/home/2011/07/11/page-1/
Page 10; ignorant bro comes up and makes false accusations of the main character being a Swedish immigrant named Steel.
For those who are not of the Scandinavian persuasion, Ståle means/is based on steel. Furthermore, due to my own experiences with Americans attempting to pronounce Norwegian names, it'd be more likely for his boss to call him "Stole" or "Stool" than "Stale", unless she'd only ever seen it written.
Furthermore, "I am not drinking this" is not a sentence that would realistically be uttered by a Norwegian.
Fun facts: "Lars" is a common Scandinavian name, and whoever wrote this thing mistakenly left in the Norwegian spelling of "Migraine" on page 14. That's as far as I've gotten so far.
There. There's my nitpicking/funfacting done for the moment. People should know better than to post links to webcomics in threads I may potentially read at some point.
Batman:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Warning: While you were typing, 10 new replies have been posted. You may wish to not give a tinker's bum and post anyways.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 29, 2012, 10:25:06 am
Batman:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Warning: While you were typing, 10 new replies have been posted. You may wish to not give a tinker's bum and post anyways.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Frumple on July 29, 2012, 10:32:43 am
"More news from the terrible tragedy on Pandora. As you may recall, just last week an accident on a scale so far unseen in the mining expeditions operation struck, causing terribly devastation among both the native population and the <mining company>'s infrastructure. We have just now received the information that sheds light on this terrible occurrence. <Person>?
Thank you, <other person>. Investigators have finally released their findings. What they've found is as sad as it is terrible. As we had known, last week an accident occurred in pandoran orbit, resulting in one of the mining transports being forced to jettison its cargo, an act that ultimately resulted in the destruction of the Na'Vi cultural center <tree name> as well as causing damage to the ongoing mining and research operation stationed on the planet. Investigators have found that it was minute damage caused by a splinter group of particularly beligerant Na'Vi extremists* that forced the cargo hauler to jettison its contents. Experts have come forth and confirmed that, had the hauler's pilot not made his horrifying decision -- at the cost of his own life** -- the damage from the hauler itself losing orbit and crashing could have been exponentially worse -- among other things, the splinter Na'Vi group had somehow damaged part of the engine and power storage, meaning an impact could have turned the hauler into an explosive of a scale unseen in Pandoran history.
Even now, the <mining company> is mobilizing to send humanitarian aid to the native pandoran population and help both in relocation and reconstruction. They have vowed to do everything in their power to make amends to the devastated pandoran people, even in the face of the economic and personal losses they suffered from this tragedy. Back to you, <other person>.
Thank you, <person>. Our hearts go out both to the pandoran people and <mining company>, struggling together through this hard time."
It'd be like the BP oil spill, but with rocks, more immediate loss of life, and just a little bit of proactivity.
... anyway. That'd be the sort of movie I'd actually... well, maybe not quite enjoy, per se, but at least not face palm at. I know the major reason that we usually don't get competent villains is because they'd bloody well win, but still... I could stand a bad-guy wins scenario occasionally. S'much more reasonable than basically lobotomizing your antagonist :-\
*Bonus points, include "led by ecoterroist <whoever the hell that main character was>."
**This part probably being a lie.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 11:04:45 am
2. The only freight shuttles in Pandora's orbits are the Valkyries, of which there are only two. These are also not designed to drop loads mid flight, and are probably incapable of doing so. They are also fusion powered, and therefore even in an impact wouldn't do so much damage. Besides, a shuttle on an incorrect reentry would burn up completly, so one wonders why the the pilot wouldn't do that, if jettisoning the cargo did somehow help)
3. Unobtanium costs 20 million/ kg. They are not going to drop that. (Also, it floats in the flux field, due it's magnetical effects). Besides, shuttle cargo isn't solid enough to make a good drop projectile. (To loose, it would just scatter as a nonharmfull impact)
4. And when should that damage have happened. It's a freakin shuttle, taking of directly from Hells Gate.
5. Due to it's magnetical flux field, the tree of Souls doesn't lie on the normal flight path of the cargo shuttles.
6. Strange isn't it. That just that place had to be hit, what are the odds.
7. Especially strange that since the place was surrounded by flying mountains, the impact angle would have needed to be steep(not going to happen with a ship trying to get into orbit) or especially dangerous(and wipe out the entire Hallelujah moutains)
And while all of these would be lies, these are points any intelligent person on Pandora will make. When then someone tells them that the Na'vi where gathering a warforce near said cultural place after tensions caused by forcible relocation by RDA forces, all hell is going to break loose.
Not to mention the other articles that would surely follow.
-Own people first. RDA spents thousands to aid extraterrestials while millions live in poverty
-Don't let this happen again. RDA activity on the moon already caused irrepairable damage to local exosystem and indiginous cultures. Project should be shut down immediatly.
Above that, a mass drop is not that easy and why should they bother. The actual plan worked until Cameron threw in a Deus ex Machina. Besides The Valkyrie is not designed to drop cargo mid flight, mass drops are not as easily as they seemed to be, the actual preparation might have taken several days of time they didn't have. (They got at maximum one week to design an impact pellet, aim it at the tree of souls, come up with an impact trajectory that would not cause it to hit any of the passing mountains, launch the ship and aim.(this is going to take 1-2 days at least)). And what if there are spies on the inside, who would tell the natives before the ship can be launched. Then they might launch a preemptive attack.
Post by: Skyrunner on July 29, 2012, 11:13:38 am
And who knows if fusion engines would be dangerous on impact or not? For starters, everything in Pandoraverse explodes when damaged, for some reason. Second, if the fusion reactor contains plasma, the magnetic field containing yhe plasma could break, loosing thousand degree or more plasma by the kilogram into the forest. Cue immense fire.
Post by: MrWillsauce on July 29, 2012, 11:19:46 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 11:21:55 am
But the article sounds plausible. Seems pretty likely many people would go over to that. I don't think people would be poring over the article looking for discrepancies.The RDA has serious PR issues. The entire Avatar project and such where set up just to please the masses. Then there's the matter of PETA/ greenpeace and a large part of the scientific community opposing the RDA. A compagny whose funding exceeds that of small nations has many enemies. The RDA only got their mining license because of PETA screwing up.
And who knows if fusion engines would be dangerous on impact or not? For starters, everything in Pandoraverse explodes when damaged, for some reason. Second, if the fusion reactor contains plasma, the magnetic field containing yhe plasma could break, loosing thousand degree or more plasma by the kilogram into the forest. Cue immense fire.
Why take such a huge PR risk and economical risk(mass drops are not to be laughed at) when attacking the Tree of Souls works too. I mean, even with the homefield advantage, and with the RDA navigating difficult terrain the Na'Vi managed to take out, what? Maybe ten scorpions, no more surely.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Second: Fusion plasma is not a thousand degrees. A Million degrees is a bit closer. However, the actual pressure in a fusion reactor is so low that the reactor would implode, not explode. If you were to stand in a fusion reactor today it would feel like a sunny day. (Before you die of radiation/ aphixation of course).
Third: Fusion reactors are notoriously hard to keep going. Damage to the engine would shut it down rather then have it meltdown.
Fourth: The Shuttle wouldn't even reach the ground, so none of this is a problem.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 11:23:00 am
One of the many things that bugs me about the Matrix trilogy is why the machines choose humans as their energy source. Surely other animals or even plants (although I doubt plants could survive in the wasteland) would be more efficient for energy farming and much easier to control than humans.There are more humans? (Except for small beetles and such) Anyway, I think the matrix breaks the second law of thermodynamics already, so don't matter.
Post by: MrWillsauce on July 29, 2012, 11:26:08 am
Post by: Greiger on July 29, 2012, 11:32:16 am
If those magnetic coils or what not were strong enough to get them that far above the surface (with the top facing coils being completely useless for thrust unlike in a tunnel which probably halves it's total thrust), the things should never, ever, hit a wall of a tunnel no matter how fast they are going.
Post by: DJ on July 29, 2012, 11:33:13 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 11:34:24 am
I would've just bioengineered a superplague to wipe out the Na'vi, and make it look like an accidental transmission of some Earth virus. Of course, for PR there'd be hospitals and research centres and all that stuff set up to supposedly help the Na'vi.Earth science might be good, but they can't bio engineer a virus in 7 days. Not one that has to kill an entire planet of natives anyway.
Post by: DJ on July 29, 2012, 11:35:28 am
Post by: Kagus on July 29, 2012, 11:39:07 am
Especially seeing as they have a perfect hybrid DNA staging ground which would allow the bug to mutate and adapt on its own terms before going cross-species. Damn near wouldn't even need the help of expert geneticists.
Post by: Il Palazzo on July 29, 2012, 11:42:16 am
One of the many things that bugs me about the Matrix trilogy is why the machines choose humans as their energy source. Surely other animals or even plants (although I doubt plants could survive in the wasteland) would be more efficient for energy farming and much easier to control than humans.I like to think that the machines kept humans around for moral reasons, i.e.: "They're our ancestors, dumb fucks that they are we should still keep them around in a zoo or something. Especially that they can't really live in the wild anymore." They gave them a bit of living space that sort of looks like home, and hooked them up to the grid to recover at least some of the costs, because that's the only way to sustain the whole thing in that fucked up world.
It's just the fanatics from the resistance that can't grasp that the energy is not the goal. And since we see the film from the resistance's perspective...
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 11:46:09 am
That's why you make the virus before you set off, or at least en route.But why? The RDA is not evil(Not that evil anyway). They don't want to screw over the local environement or kill off the local populace. Why would they take such a huge risk for something that won't do them any good. From the RDA's point of view the natives aren't that dangerous . After all the RDA mine and the NA vi populace have been living toghether for a good 30 years, whitout any major problems. It's only recently that the relations had worsened, due to communication mishaps and direct provocation by the RDA.
Spoiler: Extended edition spoiler (click to show/hide)
Again, as pointed out before, they somehow managed to develop a method of genetically engineering a human/Na'Vi hybrid and then creating the cloning equipment required to produce the damn things. Something tells me that a virus wouldn't be that hard to pull off.Then again. There are enough biochemical barriers to prevent a virus from jumping between human and Na'vi. While they are probably perfectly capable of creating a virus, they have no reason to do so.
Especially seeing as they have a perfect hybrid DNA staging ground which would allow the bug to mutate and adapt on its own terms before going cross-species. Damn near wouldn't even need the help of expert geneticists.
Post by: DJ on July 29, 2012, 11:55:45 am
Post by: MrWillsauce on July 29, 2012, 12:02:20 pm
Quote
I like to think that the machines kept humans around for moral reasons, i.e.: "They're our ancestors, dumb fucks that they are we should still keep them around in a zoo or something. Especially that they can't really live in the wild anymore." They gave them a bit of living space that sort of looks like home, and hooked them up to the grid to recover at least some of the costs, because that's the only way to sustain the whole thing in that fucked up world.
It's just the fanatics from the resistance that can't grasp that the energy is not the goal. And since we see the film from the resistance's perspective...
That would also make sense, and I do like the idea, but it seems too illogical and sentimental for machine thought. Then again things in the Matrix trilogy rarely make sense, so we're free to speculate our own explanations for the nonsense.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 12:31:59 pm
Why does USA have so many damn nukes even though they don't actually plan to nuke anyone? Gotta be prepared, bro. And you don't have to be Nostradamus to predict that natives could start making trouble for your people that are stripping their land of ridiculously valuable resources.Because the USSR had nukes to. Here there is a massive power discrepancy, the Na Vi are armed with bows and arrows. Against gunships, rockets and machine guns. The mere existence of the virus proves a far greater threat than the Na Vi would ever be. Should it's existence be discovered, the RDA will loose it's mining rights, not only of Pandora, but also of the Moon and Mars. The organization might even be completly disbanded.
Post by: DJ on July 29, 2012, 12:42:57 pm
As for gunships, rockets etc., they're quite simply more expensive and less effective than a virus. Any rational board of directors would opt for the more cost effective thing.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 01:05:06 pm
The entire Avatar project was funded solely because of PR reasons. A single avatar costs 5 million dollars. Assuming they get two avatars a year*. That's at least 10 million a year, probably way more if we count the other costs. And that's only a small part of their PR program. The RDA has had serious PR problems. Besides, there is the question about moral objections the board of directors might have. The deleted scenes planned for Selfridge to protest against Quaritch actions, and be locked up in his own command center. I doubt that even in a board of directors based solely on profits you'd find people willingly deciding to genocide a whole species.
Then there is the question of wherether or not the virus would have been used. Quarritch managed to defeat the Na Vi two to one, on their terrain, and by entering one of their ambushes. All that with minimal losses. At no points the Na Vi ever where a serious threat, never near as dangerous enough to deploy an engineered virus that would wipe out a whole species.
As for the virus being relatively cheap. It costs 5 million for each avatar clone, and that is with the technology already in place. The cost for the actual Dna replication would be a lot more.
* ISV's arrive yearly. And the only one we saw carried 2 avatars, so I'm going to take that as the number.
Post by: Sheb on July 29, 2012, 01:35:01 pm
Another thing I really dislike is the way the natives can't fight for themselves until the White Man comes up to lead them. I felt like watching Pocahontas or something.
Oh, and what's that Deux Ex Machina you're contantly refering to? The big bird?
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 01:44:47 pm
Well, I think you got me convinced. Although if they had such PR problems, why blow the Tree up, rather than dig underneath it/find some kind of plant disease? Surely blowing up the major cultural center of the native isn't good.The tree was right on top of their proposed strip mine. As for finding plant diseases, it might be that Pandoran's biology is extremely disease resistant.(The original 90's script had Eywa curing human diseases, for example). Even on Earth a healthy tree takes more than a few months to be brought down by any disease.(Except for some dangerous bugs, of course). (Besides, natural (plant)diseases don't fit in with the natural Paradise we got here.)
Another thing I really dislike is the way the natives can't fight for themselves until the White Man comes up to lead them. I felt like watching Pocahontas or something.
Oh, and what's that Deux Ex Machina you're contantly refering to? The big bird?
(As for blowing up hometree, they got themselves a slightly valid reason in the extended edition)
Spoiler: Spoilers (click to show/hide)
Post by: DJ on July 29, 2012, 02:22:36 pm
Post by: Kagus on July 29, 2012, 02:28:22 pm
Huge corporations getting shut down by government, greedy CEOs getting trials instead of golden parachutes? There's fiction, and there's just plain ridiculousness. Have you been under a rock this whole global economic crisis?Now now, that's just being nitpicky.
I suppose I'll hearken back to that bit about zombies in zombie movies not attacking/eating each other... Especially seeing as in Mr. Romero's "Land of the Dead" (I really have no idea why this guy's supposed to be an aficionado), there's actually a scene in which a zombie is shown eating himself. I mean, if they did stuff like that, you could just wait a few weeks and the whole thing'd blow over (or you could just move to Madagascar, because nothing gets into that place).
Post by: 10ebbor10 on July 29, 2012, 02:31:03 pm
Huge corporations getting shut down by government, greedy CEOs getting trials instead of golden parachutes? There's fiction, and there's just plain ridiculousness. Have you been under a rock this whole global economic crisis?I'm an optimist. Then again, it appears the governements in Avatar actually care about what's left of the environement, so...
As for zombie rampages, the Romero one is the only one that would realistically work. All recently dead rising is rather a lot.
Post by: DJ on July 29, 2012, 02:35:51 pm
Post by: Neonivek on July 29, 2012, 05:23:17 pm
I'm sorry, but that kind of fiction is just too out there for me to swallow. The golden rule is that he who has the gold makes the rules. Always was, still is, always will be.
Especially since it actually has a monopoly.
Lets just face it... even with all this justification of Avatar's plot... it is still a rocky plotline that is best left forgotten. It is a movie where you have to forget there even is a plot to enjoy fully.
Post by: Flare on July 29, 2012, 08:44:08 pm
There' a difference between ships armed with active weaponry and shuttles that could be used to crash on Earth. Besides, as evidenced by the post above, the RDA was required to sign a contract that they would not use/own any WMD or participate in the militarization of space.
...
3. They wouldn't have got permission to build the ship without signing the contract. I'm pretty sure they made sure that the RDA wouldn't cheat on them.
This is the mechanics of how they implemented their intentions, not whether their intentions are justified or make sense which is what we're examining here. They could just as easily made them sign a contract that forbid them from carrying logging or mining equipment. The justifications of which wouldn't support this sort of decision. You're already trusting them control a ship that can end the world, and yet you don't trust them to being able use nukes responsibly?
Quote
1. All RDA officials live on Earth. Sure they could hold each mutually hostage, but it would accomplish much
You're confusing two different things. There's trust, and motivation. Both of which support the fact that the earth governments shouldn't really have that much of a problem letting them have small, low yield nukes. This is the same risk, albeit a lot larger than simply letting them carry nukes. You nuke earth, you set of MAD. In any case, they wouldn't have a reason to nuke earth anymore than they would crash a part of the ship into earth. There's really no reason why they would be motivated either way. And since they can
2. Also, using the ship as a weapon would be rather hard.
-The ship requires 6 months to arcelerate
-At those speeds, even a dust particle would blow up the entire ship. It has shields to avoid this, but since the defense systems relies on the first 3 shields being destroyed in the collision, just sending 2 pebble sized objects can destroy it.
-An integral part of the ships arceleration is a giant laser placed somewhere in the solar system. I'm pretty sure this one would be under governement control. [/quote]
You would not need to go at full speed, even at 0.2c the amount of energy that you're packing in 5 tons entering the atmosphere will be still be quite huge. Besides that, just release the payload once you're inside the oort cloud. Space is big, and mostly empty, hitting something once you're in the oort cloud is incredibly low. And travelling at that velocity, it won't leave earth much time to enact countermeasures.
As for the laser acceleration thing, if a ship can stop itself from achieving 0.7c within the time frame of the journey, it still can achieve these this speed albeit in a much larger time frame, this doesn't really change the fact that they're taking this voyage in what essentially amounts to a planet killer.
Quote
4. Fusion only happens at high temperatures/high densities. In order to have a fusion bomb you'd need to use a fission bomb to set it off. As for using them to burn forests, why? The RDA doesn't want to destroy the forests, nor anger the natives, the general public or the United Nations if they don't need too. Over it's thirty year colonization, the RDA has cut maybe just enough forest to justify 3 warheads. (The mine, Hell's gate and Hometree). Nevertheless, they would still need to invest in logging equipment, if only to control the Jungle when it grows back. Blowing it up works the first time, but after that your own material gets in the way.
Why yes, you probably need fission to set the bomb off, what does this have to do with the raised points? Aren't you just lampooning your previous statement that pure fission weapons don't exist? Surely there are some bombs that don't militarily require such a large yield that only utilize fission. Tactical warheads are one such possibility.
Also, how do you know the RDA has only cut enough for 3 warheads ???? And what yields are you talking about?
The RDA is clearly shown cutting down trees, as well as bringing in logging equipment. It seems a little silly to say they have no intention of clearing the forests, or at least are not prepared to do so. They also don't seem to give much crap about the natives aside from some of the science crew.
Quote
Given the danger of anti matter weaponry, it would make sense for the governements of Earth to enforce strict rules and such. Maybe all higher RDA officials are forced to remain on Earth. Maybe there are failsafes build in in the engines. The particle arcelerators that produce the antimatter are most likely heavily guarded and governement controlled too. In the end however, why would the RDA ask for the bombs:
Remember, you are arguing against the earth governments giving the crew nukes. You need to escape the counterargument that any sort of preventative action used against the crew with their already extremely dangerous ship can't also be applied to the nukes too. Tough rules, and such, regulations, and even forcing the execs to be a place that would make retaliation easier can be similarly applied to low yield nukes as well and be much easier to do.
Quote
Negative
-Requires breaking a contract with the effects that all RDA's space bound operations would be cancelled
-Will make the natives revolt, immediatly
-PR death
Really, the costs completly outweight possible benefits
#2 I don't know whether this would be the case, nukes do seem to be quite good at ending wars with a 100% chance of surrender from the enemy when they are used ;).
#3 They have a doom ship, and the Russians already use these things to seal off underwater oil leaks, right now.
Besides, if you do it well people might be on your side. The level of need for this type of stuff seems to be quite desperate for this type of business venture to be profitable. So long as you make the natives look slightly unreasonable, I don't think the population of earth would be all that angry with the crew. It's kinda like how in some Middle Eastern and Latin American countries outright take the land from people living there to construct oil platforms or factories. Unfortunately the population right now seems quite apathetic to these people.
Post by: kaenneth on July 29, 2012, 09:01:43 pm
Human were destroying their environment and killing each other; the machines stopped that.
Some humans rebel, and they need to be stopped to protect the greater number of humans.
Agent Smith just went nuts however.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 29, 2012, 09:14:08 pm
Agent Smith just went nuts however.Smith isn't a Machine. He's Matrix software. Insane sapient Matrix software.
Anyway, it is worth noting that the First Matrix was a paradise beyond compare, but its inhabitants couldn't handle that and started dying. Learning from this, the Machines deduced that humans thrive on suffering and thus the Second Matrix was a horrible unending nightmare. This also started killing everyone in the Matrix, and so the Machines learned that humans can only survive in a perpetual grey and boring but tolerable lifestyle. Thus, the aesthetic of the Third Matrix that we see in the film.
Post by: Neonivek on July 29, 2012, 09:38:41 pm
Agent Smith just went nuts however.Smith isn't a Machine. He's Matrix software. Insane sapient Matrix software.
Anyway, it is worth noting that the First Matrix was a paradise beyond compare, but its inhabitants couldn't handle that and started dying. Learning from this, the Machines deduced that humans thrive on suffering and thus the Second Matrix was a horrible unending nightmare. This also started killing everyone in the Matrix, and so the Machines learned that humans can only survive in a perpetual grey and boring but tolerable lifestyle. Thus, the aesthetic of the Third Matrix that we see in the film.
Except you are also incorrect. That wasn't the third matrix it is implied that there has been many with adjustments along the way.
Unless that was a retcon.
I am a bit surprised the machines ever turned evil personally given the background of them practically being saints and humans being devils... but I attribute that to the matrix story making little sense (though given the Matrix universe actually has a material god that exists...)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 29, 2012, 09:41:02 pm
Post by: TallAsAHouseDwarf on August 01, 2012, 03:19:57 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Skyrunner on August 05, 2012, 11:13:00 am
In Batman: Dark Knight Rising
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Batman Begins
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
... Don't start me onthe subject of the bomb being improbable >.>
Post by: Greiger on August 05, 2012, 07:36:20 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Other than that not much threw me off with the second movie.
Post by: Jopax on August 05, 2012, 08:23:05 pm
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 05, 2012, 08:48:58 pm
Post by: Scelly9 on August 05, 2012, 09:00:45 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 06, 2012, 04:13:15 am
...A device the size of your fist is going to protect a 10 foot wide bomb from radiation? How does that work?Magic :3
Seriously though that bomb would've irradiated the local Gotham waters, turned batman into carbon and caused major flooding.
Post by: Skyrunner on August 06, 2012, 04:26:21 am
But yes, detonating it in the water should have been disaster for the whole world.
Also, what I'm going at was that the signal shouldn't have been able to be received inside the truck, which was lead coated enough to block radiation, unless there was a signal relay from outside to inside which there is no proof of :P
Also ... I find it skeptical that a fusion reactor's core would asplode like that. I think it would just melt down or turn off when it ran out of battery instead of exploding.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on August 06, 2012, 04:33:45 am
Unless they are using some kind of handwaved high pressure fusion reactor, but that is just idiotic. Unless you got ridiculous magnetic fields and extremely high temperature materials it'd melt before you can even turn it on. (That's not speaking of the enormous amount of energy you'd need to turn it on).
Post by: Spaghetti7 on August 06, 2012, 04:40:00 am
That was just a TINY problem I had with the film, breaking a bit of immersion, but other than that it's very touching.
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 06, 2012, 04:50:41 am
I think it was implied that Batman turned autopilot on and got away from the blast radius xDThe autopilot that is mentioned to be useless and broken?
Post by: Kagus on August 06, 2012, 05:04:30 am
I think it was implied that Batman turned autopilot on and got away from the blast radius xDThe autopilot that is mentioned to be useless and broken?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: kaijyuu on August 06, 2012, 05:07:02 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Jopax on August 06, 2012, 05:07:40 am
Also, I really don't get why people are annoyed by the whole bomb exploding over water thing, it wasn't that powerfull in the first place and the Batwing was fast enough to get it a fair distance away from the city in time (remeber it could outrun those missles in the city, now image moving in a straight line, tho it was encumbered slighty).
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 06, 2012, 05:22:01 am
Also, I really don't get why people are annoyed by the whole bomb exploding over water thing, it wasn't that powerfull in the first place and the Batwing was fast enough to get it a fair distance away from the city in time (remeber it could outrun those missles in the city, now image moving in a straight line, tho it was encumbered slighty).
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Jopax on August 06, 2012, 05:40:10 am
The radiation thing kinda stands but that largely depends on wind currents and their strenght.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on August 06, 2012, 06:10:14 am
Post by: kaijyuu on August 06, 2012, 06:18:40 am
Now, if there was a fission primer...
Post by: lordcooper on August 06, 2012, 06:21:03 am
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on August 06, 2012, 08:00:28 am
While I really enjoyed this movie and the fact that the protagonist is a linguist (because I love languages), the linguistics in the movie are terrible.
First off, while Milo is running through his speech in the intro, the runes he is working with seem to be a 1-to-1 cypher for English (to the extent that a single mis-transliterated rune changes the meaning from coast of Ireland to coast of Iceland.
Then there's Atlantean: in no way does being the forerunner of all modern human speech (which is essentially what Milo calls it, on first encountering the Atlanteans) make it possible to understand all modern human speech. Think of it this way: The romance languages (French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, etc.) are descended from a common ancestor (Latin), but are not mutually intelligible.
Now, if you brought a Latin-speaking Roman forward in time, he would not be able to understand what was being said by any speaker of the Romance languages, because they have mutated over time to be very different from their common ancestor. Now I'm not saying the Roman wouldn't pick up some words that sound familiar, but even I did that when listening to the Swedish dialogue of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (which, by the way, had the best representation of computers I have ever seen in a movie). And anyway, even if being "descended from a root dialect" (aren't all languages descended from root dialects?) makes the descendant tongues intelligible to you, wouldn't that work the other way as well?
I can only assume it's actually the Heart of Atlantis that's helping the Atlanteans speak to the outsiders.
Post by: Neonivek on August 06, 2012, 11:41:28 am
Quote
I can only assume it's actually the Heart of Atlantis that's helping the Atlanteans speak to the outsiders.
Yeah I sort of assumed magic too.
Especially since a language that all languages are derived from, an impressive feat given human history, would have to be some sort of innate magic language.
Post by: palsch on August 06, 2012, 01:43:53 pm
Then there's Atlantean: in no way does being the forerunner of all modern human speech (which is essentially what Milo calls it, on first encountering the Atlanteans) make it possible to understand all modern human speech.Not that this changes any of your complaints, but the producers actually hired Marc Okrand (who created the Klingon language) to produce a passable Proto-Indo-European (PIE) based language for the film, so the language itself should be more solid than it's usage.
Similarly there was such a language created for Prometheus. Language Log had a geek out dissecting some of it here (http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=4008) that even got 4Chan to comment on how damned nerdy it was. Seems the PIE linguistics in that film was better than the science. Or the English script for that matter.
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on August 06, 2012, 06:06:28 pm
Yeah - no complaints about Okrand's linguistics and abilities as a conlanger. My complaint is entirely against the screenwriters.Then there's Atlantean: in no way does being the forerunner of all modern human speech (which is essentially what Milo calls it, on first encountering the Atlanteans) make it possible to understand all modern human speech.Not that this changes any of your complaints, but the producers actually hired Marc Okrand (who created the Klingon language) to produce a passable Proto-Indo-European (PIE) based language for the film, so the language itself should be more solid than it's usage.
Similarly there was such a language created for Prometheus. Language Log had a geek out dissecting some of it here (http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=4008) that even got 4Chan to comment on how damned nerdy it was. Seems the PIE linguistics in that film was better than the science. Or the English script for that matter.
Post by: NobodyPro on August 06, 2012, 07:26:06 pm
Post by: MrWillsauce on August 06, 2012, 09:19:14 pm
Post by: Heron TSG on August 06, 2012, 09:24:01 pm
Post by: Frumple on August 06, 2012, 09:47:43 pm
Post by: zombie urist on August 07, 2012, 10:10:29 pm
Spoiler: Batman Begins (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: The Dark Knight (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: The Dark Knight Rises (click to show/hide)
Post by: kaijyuu on August 07, 2012, 10:14:13 pm
Post by: NobodyPro on August 07, 2012, 10:19:43 pm
Post by: Willfor on August 07, 2012, 10:33:17 pm
Ideally, a movie's dialogue always takes precedence over everything in the mix. This is rule #1. This is film sound 101. This is why professional engineers are going to cry if this movie gets an award for its sound mixing. (The soundtrack is WONDERFUL though, in my opinion)
Post by: Kilroy the Grand on August 07, 2012, 10:57:29 pm
Post by: Neonivek on August 07, 2012, 11:25:29 pm
Well that can be explained by human stubbornness and stupidity.
Yeah but it is sort of over the top.
Also this is Nitpicks that ruined movies. Of course every nitpick has a explanation.
For example: "How did they hear Rosebud in Citizen Cain when there was no one in the room?"
Answer: "Someone had great hearing, there was someone off screen, they were listening through the door, there was a recorder under his bed"
Done.
Post by: penguinofhonor on August 07, 2012, 11:30:18 pm
Spoiler: The Dark Knight (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lord Inquisitor on August 08, 2012, 12:09:34 am
The guys a traitor pure and simple and a Xenophilia.
peta are terrorists so how do they have power at all.
The gift of blankets worked in the past it will work again.
Comets and asteroidsm unfortunate completly natural disaster
RF resonant earthquakes, if a human with basic equipment can pull it off now they can do it planetwide.
rods of god, get a lump of high density metal like tungstan or DU, give it a boost with decent orbit path and let it impact on site.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on August 08, 2012, 02:55:03 am
The blue Pocahontas movie again.
The guy is a traitor pure and simple and a Xenophilia.Xenophilia is a noun, not an adjective
PETA are terrorists so how do they have any power at all.
The gift of blankets worked in the past so it will work again.
Comets and asteroids might cause an unfortunate completely natural disaster
RF resonant earthquakes, if a human with basic equipment can pull it off now they should be able to do it planetwide.
Rods of god, get a lump of high density metal like tungsten or DU, give it a boost with decent orbit path and let it impact on site
Now on to the actual errors in the post:
1. Have you seen Pocahontas? There are quite a lot of differences. Sure it shares the basic plotline, but not much more
2. That's one valid character intrepretation. I suppose
3. Sure, Terrorists have no influence at all. It's not like they would be able to destroy a target in one of the most densely populated cities on the planet, and so ground the entire airtraffic and cause parranoia for Years. Besides the PETA was only the radical part of a much larger planetwide movement which probably involved lots of scientists and several other political parties.
4. Results of the past are no guarantee for the future. Making a virus/bacteria/parasite in a single day doesn't work, and making it in advance makes no sense. Should it be discivered, the RDA will suffer serious backlash. Should they use it, they are going to get blamed even without proof. All that would lose them millions in PR to hold onto their mining license All that to kill of some natives using spears and sticks. Seems like a bit of overkill to me. Remember, before the Deus Ex Machina they only managed to kill 10 choppers max, and that was during an ambush on their home terrain with the marines equipment partially disabled.
5.
a)The ISV's have equipment onboard for in system navigation. You ain't gonna be able to say nobody could see it coming
b)Useful meteroids are hard to find, and certainly can't be procured in a weeks time
c)It would mean you would blow up your own base too
d)Unobtanium is a very comple compound. An impact would damage or destroy it.
6. Guarantees of the past are no guarantees for the future. Cost increases exponentially as size increases, and I think the experiment failed. Besides why would you create an Earthquake, the only thing you're going to do is damage your own base. Trees are quite resilient to Earthquakes.
7.
a)They are not allowed to use, make or own weapons of mass destruction
b)Therefore, they would need to make said object. This means, that in about 4 days they need to develop a drop projectile, launch it into space(1.5 days), line up the orbit , and then fire the projectile so that it flies through the flying mountains, into a magnetically charged field, into a canyon on the target. Keep in mind that their ships and techs are made to be as light as possible, so they'll most likely have to use planet found materials.(No tungsten or DU). They have to do a precision strike, because a large strike would damage their own base.
Keep in mind that the humans aren't genocidally evil. There were semipeaceful relations with the Na Vi for quite a long time.
Post by: Detonate on August 08, 2012, 03:51:57 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Jokes aside, how many of these little things actually ruined the movies for you?
Post by: MrWillsauce on August 08, 2012, 03:57:49 am
Quote
Jokes aside, how many of these little things actually ruined the movies for you?None. Tarantino is the shit.
Post by: Detonate on August 08, 2012, 04:32:46 am
QuoteJokes aside, how many of these little things actually ruined the movies for you?None. Tarantino is the shit.
I was talking about the other posts in thread like "x did something,but it would be better to do this!" or "how did they do this?". I really hope people don't actually think what I posted.
Post by: scriver on August 08, 2012, 04:48:59 am
Post by: MrWiggles on August 08, 2012, 05:32:03 am
I have a weird relationship with them. I wanna like, as I enjoy the art style, and find the production value overall decent, but often times I find his particular nitpicks just fuckin wrong.
Post by: NRDL on August 08, 2012, 05:40:36 am
So, yeah, Ras was just being a jerk.
I can't really think of anything to nitpick...
Post by: Starver on August 08, 2012, 05:50:24 am
I hate when stuff just don't make sense in movies. Like Terminator 3: Why would you want your killer robots to be motorcycle? Why would you include control on them so that a human may use them? Why do you have a fully-fleshed user interface in Skynet's lair?Because T800s might need to interact with them (cycles and lair computers, both) but they have been given no bluetooth capability? ;)
(Given the number of pages gone by, in this thread, which I still need to read, this might be a virtually necrotic point. As might my reiteration of Why The Heck Does That Guy From The Latest Terminator Movie Still Wear His Hi-Vis Vest When Fighting Giant Robots That Could Squish Him Like A Bug In An Instant!)
Post by: Starver on August 08, 2012, 06:46:20 am
Note: There's some equation which was solved by some smart scientists and a lot of guessing which suggests that there are about 20 intelligent alien civilazations in the universe.1) There's still a lot of guessing, making the error-bars quite huge
2) The equation itself actually limits itself to civilisations that we would communicate with via radio (which clearly the Avatar abrogines are not), as well as limiting itself to basically M-Class Planet life (which at least the Avatar world basically is), ignoring all the other possibilities that we could imagine, and doubtless many others that even the SF-community has no concept of.
3) I've never ever seen any use of the Drake Equation suggestion anything like there being a mere 20 alien civilisations in the entire universe. (Except for the ones where values have been used that suggest none at all, making even our existence unlikely!) Even "20 in our own galaxy" is a little on the low side. Wikipedia has Drake's original range of estimate of 1,000 to 100 million in our galaxy. Although its "worst case of values" scenario does tend drift towards zero (universe-wide), that's an extreme outlier. (The "Best of the best" scenario" says 180 million in our galaxy, if I read it correctly, but that's also an outlier.)
Life (even (or indeed especially!) of the restrictive type the Drake Equation predicts) wouldn't necessarily be evenly distributed, in the Universe (or Galaxy). Stars are clumped (in galaxies, when considering the universal scale!), and interstellar conditions vary across any given area in so many other ways. When considering (say) Alpha Centauri as a potential contemporary co-evolver of life, consider that it is a star(-system) of very similar age to ours ('only' 250 million years adrift, out of a few billion or so total life), and probably from the same star-birthing grounds (with the same intermix of basic elements from which to build planets and the chemical processes upon them), in an area of the galaxy that has certainly been free of catastrophic radiation surges from a nearby supernova, at any critical point in our (pre-)history, and even (possibly!) whether it had been subject to the same hail of intragalactic panspermia-propagating interstellar space-debris (if that's got anything to do with how life arises). Being close to us means that it's got several good chances of having the same sort of pre-biological conditions and (if not panspermia-induced) elements to kick off with whatever form of abiogenesis might have arisen.
OTOH, the whole Centauri system is a lot more complicated than ours, but with it being an "AB-C" system (Alpha Centauris 'A' and 'B' being binary, with 'C'/Proxima also being relatively close), so whether a suitably life-supporting rocky planet is even more doubtful than the possibility of such a planet having accreted.
Which is not to say it might not be possible, and life on binary-orbiting planets is frequently seen in fiction (everything from Tatooine, of Star Wars fame (a hand-waved, 'this is an exotic planet (of entirely one biome!)' filmic shortcut, at least in its original conception and prior to any retroactive attempts to justify) to the Helliconia series (by Brian Aldiss, who actively employed the vagaries of having a planet in a long-period binary-system as a major story-arc plot-point, essentially, and in an attempt to run with a viable setting for this largely non-terrestrial storyline), and some fiction gets these things right, even before the science is willing to stand up and counted on the same point. OTO(O!)H, there's a lot more rubbish (or bad misses) out there than that which is accurately prophetic of yet-to-be-confirmed scientific realities. ;)
(i.e. I get your point about Avatar's planet, but you can't just point at Drake and use that to discredit its existence.)
Post by: ed boy on August 08, 2012, 06:53:32 am
Jokes aside, how many of these little things actually ruined the movies for you?For me it was the start of inglorius bastards where it. Claimed to be based on a true story. I thought it was just amplified for drama until they shredded Hitler.
Post by: Kagus on August 08, 2012, 07:06:29 am
First of all, it tries too hard to make it seem "real", and winds up making all the mistakes they could have easily avoided by doing exactly what they were doing anyways, effectively sabotaging their own attempt at suspending disbelief.
Second, how exactly do they find an Alaskan professor who specializes in a dead language that existed in a place nowhere remotely close to where he's located and works, and not only manages to detect, hear, interpret and then recite back fragments of that dead language from a bad audio recording, despite scientists not having any real clue as to what that language sounded like. We only have access to the written form, with no real close relatives that we can make an accurate estimate.
Thirdly... Well, alright. I suppose having just been "abducted" to some girl's "haunted" apartment for our first date and then having her rip on me the whole time before attempting to convert me to alienism via this really quite bad (not to mention wholly fictional!) movie.
That's the kind of story I really kinda wish I was still blogging for. The whole setup is just too good.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 08, 2012, 07:19:15 am
Spoiler: The Dark Knight (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on August 08, 2012, 07:55:13 am
I can't discredit the it's existence of qnything. I can just point out the improbability of the whole thing.Note: There's some equation which was solved by some smart scientists and a lot of guessing which suggests that there are about 20 intelligent alien civilazations in the universe.1) There's still a lot of guessing, making the error-bars quite huge
2) The equation itself actually limits itself to civilisations that we would communicate with via radio (which clearly the Avatar abrogines are not), as well as limiting itself to basically M-Class Planet life (which at least the Avatar world basically is), ignoring all the other possibilities that we could imagine, and doubtless many others that even the SF-community has no concept of.
3) I've never ever seen any use of the Drake Equation suggestion anything like there being a mere 20 alien civilisations in the entire universe. (Except for the ones where values have been used that suggest none at all, making even our existence unlikely!) Even "20 in our own galaxy" is a little on the low side. Wikipedia has Drake's original range of estimate of 1,000 to 100 million in our galaxy. Although its "worst case of values" scenario does tend drift towards zero (universe-wide), that's an extreme outlier. (The "Best of the best" scenario" says 180 million in our galaxy, if I read it correctly, but that's also an outlier.)
Life (even (or indeed especially!) of the restrictive type the Drake Equation predicts) wouldn't necessarily be evenly distributed, in the Universe (or Galaxy). Stars are clumped (in galaxies, when considering the universal scale!), and interstellar conditions vary across any given area in so many other ways. When considering (say) Alpha Centauri as a potential contemporary co-evolver of life, consider that it is a star(-system) of very similar age to ours ('only' 250 million years adrift, out of a few billion or so total life), and probably from the same star-birthing grounds (with the same intermix of basic elements from which to build planets and the chemical processes upon them), in an area of the galaxy that has certainly been free of catastrophic radiation surges from a nearby supernova, at any critical point in our (pre-)history, and even (possibly!) whether it had been subject to the same hail of intragalactic panspermia-propagating interstellar space-debris (if that's got anything to do with how life arises). Being close to us means that it's got several good chances of having the same sort of pre-biological conditions and (if not panspermia-induced) elements to kick off with whatever form of abiogenesis might have arisen.
OTOH, the whole Centauri system is a lot more complicated than ours, but with it being an "AB-C" system (Alpha Centauris 'A' and 'B' being binary, with 'C'/Proxima also being relatively close), so whether a suitably life-supporting rocky planet is even more doubtful than the possibility of such a planet having accreted.
Which is not to say it might not be possible, and life on binary-orbiting planets is frequently seen in fiction (everything from Tatooine, of Star Wars fame (a hand-waved, 'this is an exotic planet (of entirely one biome!)' filmic shortcut, at least in its original conception and prior to any retroactive attempts to justify) to the Helliconia series (by Brian Aldiss, who actively employed the vagaries of having a planet in a long-period binary-system as a major story-arc plot-point, essentially, and in an attempt to run with a viable setting for this largely non-terrestrial storyline), and some fiction gets these things right, even before the science is willing to stand up and counted on the same point. OTO(O!)H, there's a lot more rubbish (or bad misses) out there than that which is accurately prophetic of yet-to-be-confirmed scientific realities. ;)
(i.e. I get your point about Avatar's planet, but you can't just point at Drake and use that to discredit its existence.)
I can point the impossibility of the ship though.
Unobtanium sells for 20 million/kilo. The ISV has a cargo capacity of 350,000 kg -20.000(Crew and such). Assuming that another 20,000 is lost for the weight of the packaging we get a payload of 300,000 kg
300,000 kg * 20 million =6* 10 12 dollar a year. That's quite a lot actually.
Now we know that the propulsion system is Laser to AC, antimatter to slow down, then antimatter to arcelerate Laser to slow down.
Now assuming the hydrogen can be gathered for free and both the laser and antimatter are 100% efficient. That means the energy used for the entire voyage is equal to 3 times the energy the energy for single arceleration. (Full cost for the arceleration, half for dearcelerating, Half for rearcelerating, Full for stopping on Earth).
Assuming that the energy price is a little inflated, I'm not making any idiot errors, and 1 dollar equals 1 euro. This means that we have an energy budget of maximum (6*1012/3/0.2*Kwh= 1*1013 Kwh = 1016 W/hour=1016*3600= 36*1018 Joules)
Now the formula for kinetic energy =M*v2/2
72*1018=m*(299,792,458)2
Meaning that we have enough cash to move 801 kg of matter to Alpha Centauri. If I haven't miscalculated or something.
Post by: Starver on August 08, 2012, 08:59:43 am
Re: Dark Knight "phone-tower mobile internet connection" thing - the device looked very much like a 'mere' Wireless LAN device that I often use. Which means either that it wouldn't actually have the same range, or with a suitably precompiled list of preferred wireless gateways (and their assorted passwords, which I wouldn't put it past the villains of the moment to have) and a sympathetic OS/client program (which is, after all, just making a large series of individually small on-line interactions), it could actually use the wireless access points 'leaking' from the various businesses and public/semi-public access points all across the city.
Another Re: Dark Knight, Bane is different in the movie to the various representations I've seen from other media. But then so is so-and-so's father (seems pretty normal and not impossibly preserved for his age). I'd treat all that as a reinterpretation of characters. The same names, largely the same type of person, but ultimately not as "supernatural" or "superscienced" and more real-life (as a contrast to some of the stuff with the bomb... and there's no real explanation as to how a certain person ever got to go to a certain café, by the end.
Spoiler: Actually, a /possible/ answer (click to show/hide)
And the core-thing exploding: However difficult it would be to get it to do so, or strange that it would be possible, remember that in-universe there was just one person capable of setting it up to do so (and of defusing it). Basically a physics-trained 'hacker' who had found some new trick (of an unexplained type), probably as a hypothetical "what if" that he didn't realise would excite the bad guys (and dismay the good guys) as much as it did. Whatever, it was a trick unanticipated, until that point, by Bruce and his tech team. He'd been sure it had been a safe thing to make that could never be weaponised, and pulled the plug once he realised it could be. Still a bit of a jump, but given the handwavium already employed in getting Waynetech stuff to work, a little finger-wiggling to subvert it to another end isn't too much of an ask.
Blake and the bus: Shows how he's going to Try To Do The Right Thing, even against all the people who Don't Want To Let Him.
Bane's voice: Yes, a common complaint, I hear. Behind the distortion was some quite clever characterisation and intermix of accents, apparently, but it got lost quite a bit.
Shawshank Redemption question: Blu-tac? ;)
Back to Avatar, and the "things going at 0.7c", c.f. relativistic baseballs (http://what-if.xkcd.com/1/). (Faster, but for smaller mass.)
On to the Matrix Trilogy, and my basic complaint about them. It alll ends wrong. "It's Matrixes [/Matrices] all the way out" would be a good summary of what I think should have been the revelation. L1: green-code Matrix, L2: firey Matrix; L3+: ??? But as the Trilogy doesn't go in that direction (despite heavy hints that it might), I'm not spoiling anything by putting this in plain text... However, it would explain (or by-pass) some other people's niggles about Matrix logic.
Similarly with the Terminator set: It's arguable that there's consistent time-loops exhibited in the movies (but the information transported is not always reliable/factual). A lot could have been done with that premise, but they go the cheap way round of "changing the future via the past". Done too much.
Here's a new niggle (for a film I've not yet seen mentioned): Can someone tell me how some of the guests for the ceremony at the end of Snowhaite And The Huntsman got there? At least two should not have been so ambulatory.
And here's one actual message to quote, without caring how in or out of context I'm taking it:
I think you might be thinking a little too hard about this.
And? ;)
(Oh, and here's a second quote...
So has anyone else watched the 'This is How X Should of Ended' cartoons?...I doubt it. "Should of" makes no sense. Please, it's "Should have", or "Should've" if you're contracting it. But that's non-movie nitpickery.)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on August 08, 2012, 09:10:07 am
But then, everything about that ship is impossible.
Post by: Vattic on August 08, 2012, 02:06:43 pm
On to the Matrix Trilogy, and my basic complaint about them. It alll ends wrong. "It's Matrixes [/Matrices] all the way out" would be a good summary of what I think should have been the revelation. L1: green-code Matrix, L2: firey Matrix; L3+: ??? But as the Trilogy doesn't go in that direction (despite heavy hints that it might), I'm not spoiling anything by putting this in plain text... However, it would explain (or by-pass) some other people's niggles about Matrix logic.I can't find the quote but I swear the Wachowski brothers promised they'd not do this and that they thought it would be cheap.
One other thing about the Matrix:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on August 08, 2012, 02:19:54 pm
One other thing about the Matrix:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: RedKing on August 08, 2012, 03:48:20 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on August 08, 2012, 04:01:59 pm
One recurrent problem that I have in action movies (and The Dark Knight Rises was guilty of it):Spoiler (click to show/hide)
And when they do use a timebomb, they don't treat it as one. (Ie, the closer the clock gets to zero, the longer it takes to tick.)
Post by: Starver on August 08, 2012, 05:09:45 pm
I can't find the quote but I swear the Wachowski brothers promised they'd not do [Matrixes, all the way out] and that they thought it would be cheap.If that's the case, they must have a) originally considered it and written it into the script, and b) forgotten to take all the heavy hints out. (How else do you explain the end of the.. 2nd...? film with the squid-stopping hand-wave, and then in the third the blindness that isn't..? To mention just the most obvious two moments, out of several.) Does TVTropes's have a term equivalent to Chekhov's Replica Firearm/Pacifist Gunsmith? Whatever you might call them, the films got loads of those... And none of them even make sense as properly integrated plot-misdirections and red-herrings for the discerning mystery solver to pile through and later see to be 'perfectly honest misconceptions', given the selective view the audience happened to be being given. They just seem to be thrown in there like an anti-McGuffin that has a lot of apparent significance but means nothing to the plot-drive...
No, I think they were going to do this, and then at a party they attended shortly before it Matrix 3 was wrapped up they got some (possibly) obnoxious so-and-so come up to them and say "I bet I know what it's all about...<insert above idea here>" and they went "oh, nononono... it's completely not that... you'll be surprised... erm... no... I couldn't tell you what the denouement is... no, honestly, I couldn't... excuse me, just got to go to the editing suite, there's something I forgot to do... just a bit of polishing, don't you know... and an emergency script meeting I'd completely forgotten about...".
Quote
One other thing about the Matrix:They obviously use the same employment agency as the Empire does for its Star Destroyer gunners in Ep4: "Well, we could shoot at that escape pod, but there's no life forms on it, and so I shall conveniently forget that while there's apparently no such thing as USB thumb-drives that could be conveying information we don't want to escape there's bloomin' ambulatory tin cans that can accomplish the same purpose and more!". To (slightly) paraphrase and extend the actual scripted line...Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on August 08, 2012, 05:30:13 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Scelly9 on August 08, 2012, 06:35:44 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Skyrunner on August 08, 2012, 06:59:36 pm
One recurrent problem that I have in action movies (and The Dark Knight Rises was guilty of it):Spoiler (click to show/hide)
And when they do use a timebomb, they don't treat it as one. (Ie, the closer the clock gets to zero, the longer it takes to tick.)
Personally, I understood that
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Urist_McDrowner on August 08, 2012, 07:22:04 pm
Honestly that aspect of Assassins Creed was so stupid that I just imagined that the machine was actually a time reader that needed a DNA match to work.
I was willing to go with it to a point, but the whole "synchronization" stuff really made me wonder. Since taking damage of any kind reduces synchronization, that would imply Altair/Ezio were never, ever injured.
He gets injured in cutscenes all the time. Synchronization lets them get away with "oh wait, I just got whacked in the head seven times by a huge axe wielded by a huge(r) badaxe. Lost a few synchronization there!"
Post by: Flying Dice on August 08, 2012, 08:36:45 pm
That's just the Cinematic Temporal Distortion Effect kicking in. As the intensity of a situation rises, more and more things become free actions. If you had a time bomb large enough to destroy the Milky Way, people could complete research into a functional, fully documented Unified Field Theory in the space between one second and another.One recurrent problem that I have in action movies (and The Dark Knight Rises was guilty of it):Spoiler (click to show/hide)
And when they do use a timebomb, they don't treat it as one. (Ie, the closer the clock gets to zero, the longer it takes to tick.)
Post by: Neonivek on August 08, 2012, 10:02:28 pm
Honestly that aspect of Assassins Creed was so stupid that I just imagined that the machine was actually a time reader that needed a DNA match to work.
I was willing to go with it to a point, but the whole "synchronization" stuff really made me wonder. Since taking damage of any kind reduces synchronization, that would imply Altair/Ezio were never, ever injured.
He gets injured in cutscenes all the time. Synchronization lets them get away with "oh wait, I just got whacked in the head seven times by a huge axe wielded by a huge(r) badaxe. Lost a few synchronization there!"
A lot of the time Altair didn't actually fight as many people as you did, a lot of scenes involve Altair actually killing his targets completely alone and isolated. Getting slashed and injured at random points is a huge shift impossibility.
The fact that you arn't dead after a single slash is also why the synchronization lowers. The fact that this is based on his genetic memories is also why you can survive any fall so long as there is hay under it or why the travel distances between cities is just a few miles. I thought it was somewhat clever in that it masks obvious game elements as elements of the simulation instead.
The "True adventures of Altair" would probably be quite boring.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on August 09, 2012, 01:34:59 am
One recurrent problem that I have in action movies (and The Dark Knight Rises was guilty of it):Spoiler (click to show/hide)
And when they do use a timebomb, they don't treat it as one. (Ie, the closer the clock gets to zero, the longer it takes to tick.)
Personally, I understood thatSpoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Urist_McDrowner on August 09, 2012, 02:15:41 am
Honestly that aspect of Assassins Creed was so stupid that I just imagined that the machine was actually a time reader that needed a DNA match to work.
I was willing to go with it to a point, but the whole "synchronization" stuff really made me wonder. Since taking damage of any kind reduces synchronization, that would imply Altair/Ezio were never, ever injured.
He gets injured in cutscenes all the time. Synchronization lets them get away with "oh wait, I just got whacked in the head seven times by a huge axe wielded by a huge(r) badaxe. Lost a few synchronization there!"
A lot of the time Altair didn't actually fight as many people as you did, a lot of scenes involve Altair actually killing his targets completely alone and isolated. Getting slashed and injured at random points is a huge shift impossibility.
The fact that you arn't dead after a single slash is also why the synchronization lowers. The fact that this is based on his genetic memories is also why you can survive any fall so long as there is hay under it or why the travel distances between cities is just a few miles. I thought it was somewhat clever in that it masks obvious game elements as elements of the simulation instead.
The "True adventures of Altair" would probably be quite boring.
Damascus to Acre
That would take, by a lightning fast 40 mph videogame horse, substantially more than an hour. Of just holding a key or a joystick.
Post by: Vattic on August 09, 2012, 03:38:09 am
All my searches are turning up blacks so maybe they never said that. I had completely forgotten the other pointers and had thought Neo stopping the sentinel was just something they decided to put in to keep people guessing afterwards. I still don't like the nested matrix idea but it does fit the facts well enough. It does raise the question of why people in Zion don't still feel out of place. I suppose the whole thing is succeeding in keeping people under the thumb of the machines but rendering everything that happened in the films meaningless is a poor plot twist.I can't find the quote but I swear the Wachowski brothers promised they'd not do [Matrixes, all the way out] and that they thought it would be cheap.If that's the case, they must have a) originally considered it and written it into the script, and b) forgotten to take all the heavy hints out. (How else do you explain the end of the.. 2nd...? film with the squid-stopping hand-wave, and then in the third the blindness that isn't..? To mention just the most obvious two moments, out of several.) Does TVTropes's have a term equivalent to Chekhov's Replica Firearm/Pacifist Gunsmith? Whatever you might call them, the films got loads of those... And none of them even make sense as properly integrated plot-misdirections and red-herrings for the discerning mystery solver to pile through and later see to be 'perfectly honest misconceptions', given the selective view the audience happened to be being given. They just seem to be thrown in there like an anti-McGuffin that has a lot of apparent significance but means nothing to the plot-drive...
No, I think they were going to do this, and then at a party they attended shortly before it Matrix 3 was wrapped up they got some (possibly) obnoxious so-and-so come up to them and say "I bet I know what it's all about...<insert above idea here>" and they went "oh, nononono... it's completely not that... you'll be surprised... erm... no... I couldn't tell you what the denouement is... no, honestly, I couldn't... excuse me, just got to go to the editing suite, there's something I forgot to do... just a bit of polishing, don't you know... and an emergency script meeting I'd completely forgotten about...".
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2012, 07:03:04 am
I'm not denying that a "woke up, and it was all a dream" event, sort of Dallas-style, could be a bad plot development, but there are ways to make it interesting. As a certain more recent film[2] may well have proven.
{1} It's not as spoilering as "He's been dead all along", and it's not as obvious as "the ship sinks", in the grand scheme of movie
spoilers, but it might be along the lines of "they all murdered him!"...
[2] That I'm not sure whether I should even mention the name of, given the spoiler-potential, but you'll probably know which one I mean.
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on August 09, 2012, 09:26:15 am
Oh, hello, a Simulist! Nice to meet you.
I'm not denying that a "woke up, and it was all a dream" event, sort of Dallas-style, could be a bad plot development, but there are ways to make it interesting. As a certain more recent film[2] may well have proven.
{1} It's not as spoilering as "He's been dead all along", and it's not as obvious as "the ship sinks", in the grand scheme of movie
spoilers, but it might be along the lines of "they all murdered him!"...
[2] That I'm not sure whether I should even mention the name of, given the spoiler-potential, but you'll probably know which one I mean.
Post by: zombie urist on August 09, 2012, 10:27:20 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Avengers (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2012, 11:03:42 am
The instruction was probably "do this for me, to the best of your ability and using all your knowledge and experience"... The target really had no reason not to include that aspect, which would have been SOP and engrained. As I read it.Spoiler: Avengers (or, to us in the UK, "Avengers Assemble") (click to show/hide)
Or the 'commanding' was spread a bit thin, by that stage.
Post by: palsch on August 09, 2012, 11:20:54 am
This (spoiler heavy) review by Loki is a good example. (http://exurbe.com/?p=1368) It even
Post by: Starver on August 09, 2012, 12:53:37 pm
(Probably too vague, but also too rushed and would rather be too vague than too informative.)
Post by: Itnetlolor on August 09, 2012, 04:14:39 pm
http://www.cracked.com/article_19920_6-movie-heroes-saved-by-gaping-plot-holes.html
Here's my response about Back to the Future 2, and how the hell Biff Tannen returned to the future after altering the past. Trust me, I put some time into this, and I gotta pat myself on the back for this.
In case is gets buried under annoying comments and time, here it is:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Do you think I filled that plothole?
Post by: Neonivek on August 09, 2012, 04:19:03 pm
Quote
Do you think I filled that plothole?
Did you need more then three paragraphs to explain it?
Post by: Vattic on August 09, 2012, 04:23:30 pm
I'll admit it's an interesting idea and one I enjoyed reading and arguing about when I was studying philosophy. You've convinced me in that those who have escaped have little reason to doubt. I know what film you are talking about despite having not seen it; Had it spoiled by people who didn't like the ending no less. I wonder how they might have worked it into the story. Would Neo of escaped the higher matrix and how? A friend of mine thinks it should have ended with all the humans being woken up to a world the machines had fixed, an Eden.
I'm not denying that a "woke up, and it was all a dream" event, sort of Dallas-style, could be a bad plot development, but there are ways to make it interesting. As a certain more recent film[2] may well have proven.
{1} It's not as spoilering as "He's been dead all along", and it's not as obvious as "the ship sinks", in the grand scheme of movie
spoilers, but it might be along the lines of "they all murdered him!"...
[2] That I'm not sure whether I should even mention the name of, given the spoiler-potential, but you'll probably know which one I mean.
Post by: Itnetlolor on August 09, 2012, 04:25:05 pm
Well, I did have to reference parts of the movie as I explain it. Can you summarize it better?QuoteDo you think I filled that plothole?
Did you need more then three paragraphs to explain it?
Post by: Neonivek on August 09, 2012, 05:00:29 pm
Well, I did have to reference parts of the movie as I explain it. Can you summarize it better?QuoteDo you think I filled that plothole?
Did you need more then three paragraphs to explain it?
Because the laws of time and space changed
The ending of the third movie explains it better then I did but basically time acts differently then it did in the first movie.
Post by: Sergius on August 09, 2012, 06:17:10 pm
*snip*
I agreed up to the point where it is Ideal-Marty going to the past instead of 1-Week-Younger-Version-of-Regular-Marty.
However:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Antioch on August 10, 2012, 06:58:07 am
In Batman: Dark Knight RisingSpoiler (click to show/hide)
1. That is actually what would probably happen. Airplane wings are designed to withstand upward forces to withstand lift. The most downward force a larger plane usually receives is gravity whilst on the ground. So 300km/h headlong wind would aslmost certainly destroy the wings.
Now what really annoyed me about the last batman was:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on August 10, 2012, 07:39:19 am
Worst! Chronological! Paradox! Ever!
On second thoughts, Time Cop (or whatever it was that had Van Damm in) with the "you touch yourself[1], you become a CGI-effect and die" probably takes a second biscuit from the same biscuit tin, on that one. (It'll not even be the same atoms, in each chronological version of yourself! You're as likely to have the same atoms meet because you happened to be caught by a gust of wind that contained a few atoms of CO2 that was/will be part of your epidermis!)
But then I prefer self-consistent time-loops, in my fiction (and prefer the aesthetics for it, also, when it comes to how the reality might be). Twelve Monkeys-style, as well as All You Zombies[2]... And that Harry Potter fanfic involving him trying the Prime Factorisation, that I got pointed at by someone on these very forums...
(I'll also accept branching universes preserving us from pardoxes, as with parallel (and possibly skewed-in-time) universes that are the ones that you effect (or effect you, but never cyclical, or only when there's no paradox), and a complete instantaneous flip-flop of 'reality' upon any of causaility-disturbing information arrival from future, but that might as well be treated as branching, for all that anyone on either original or perturbed timeline could tell.)
Now what really annoyed me about the last batman was:I kept an eye on the extras not directly involved in the centre of the acting[3], during that bit. Remarkably little got done, in that scene, by anyone else. ;)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Mind you, insofar as who prevailed, it would have been a lot different without that little technological help right at the start, which probably meant there was some appropriate morale boosts/suppression, accordingly.
[1] Your future/past self, that is, before you think dirty thoughts... OTOH, it is probably the ultimate slash-fiction subject if you take it to a certain logical conclusion...
[2] With absolutely no comments about footnote-1, here... No siree...
[3] Because by that point in the film it was pretty obvious there'd be close-ups if there was going to be any particularly interesting moves coming from the main guys, and so while there were wide-shots I could safely defy the director's intended point of focus without anything too unexpected going on at the 'centre of the storm'...
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 10, 2012, 07:47:02 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also haaaay derrr youtube product placement :3
I'd give Skyfall a 6/10, worth seeing, but don't get your hopes up. I heard people saying it was the best Bond film Daniel Craig's been in, Casino Royale was better imo.
Post by: Flying Dice on November 10, 2012, 08:11:43 pm
Post by: Starver on November 10, 2012, 10:20:11 pm
Spoiler: You are warned... (click to show/hide)
Quote
I'd give Skyfall a 6/10, worth seeing, but don't get your hopes up. I heard people saying it was the best Bond film Daniel Craig's been in, Casino Royale was better imo.Yeah, I loved the bit where he nearly hit the other guy he backed into, but they recognised each other at the last moment and did the old link-arms-and-spin-around to attack each other's attackers thing, and the French guy has to use a phrasebook to say "Ouch", and then his nephew hiccoughs his last few hiccoughs. Oh wait, that was a different Casino Royale... ;)
Personally, I'd be tempted to give it more than 6/10, but not sure how much because I tend to be more forgiving of plot problems than some people I know. I am worried about the rampant commercialisation behind it, if I'm going to be recommending everyone to see it, as well. (At the same time, I'd not want to advocate the piracy method of experiencing it... I just think it's going to make a lot of money as it is, and the fact that any non-pay TV broadcast will likely come way after any patience gives out is a problem to which I have no solution. Also, cam-versions[1] will be invariably rubbish or even of the wrong language so you really have to wait for the DVD rips to start, or settle for a leaked pre-post-production copy[2].)
But... well, YMMV, but "definitely see eventually" is my half-arsed recommendation.
[1] There was specifically a prominent warning notice at the cinema about not being allowed to record the performance where a film-advertising poster normally goes, behind the ticket desk. Given all the usual warnings already posted at the doors to the various screens and invariably during the half-hour-long trailer segment prior to the film start, I found this overkill that could not have been a cheap extension to the already present notifications.
[2] Speaking only from experience of what others have shown me, proud to have the latest release of the moment through unethical means, only to present something that has half-finished effects or wobbly/unfocussed screen framing with toilet-goers silhouetting themselves. No, I'd rather wait for it to be on broadcast TV than that, usually.
Post by: Neonivek on November 10, 2012, 10:32:53 pm
Quote
It'd wait for the guy to die of infection before nommin'.
In another hint that scientists can actually be just as stupid as you and me... They found out Komodo dragons actually do have poison. (unless that has changed since then)
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 10, 2012, 11:38:06 pm
Okay, my additions/responses to the James Bond/Skyfall thing, then, with the penalty on my memory of it being a number of days since I saw it...Spoiler: You are warned... (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
QuoteIt'd wait for the guy to die of infection before nommin'.In another hint that scientists can actually be just as stupid as you and me... They found out Komodo dragons actually do have poison. (unless that has changed since then)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on November 11, 2012, 12:03:46 am
Quote
So a quick search reveals that Komodo dragons are not poisonous, but they are venomous
Same thing if you use what people usually mean when they say "Poisonous". In that you can be "Poisoned" by that creature.
Mind you "Envenomed" is a real word too.
Quote
they've also got a venom that acts as a coagulant, making its prey bleed out or die from infection
You may want to read this very carefully for mistakes.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 11, 2012, 12:09:24 am
Same thing if you use what people usually mean when they say "Poisonous". In that you can be "Poisoned" by that creature.Did you eat the Komodo dragon, then suffer its ill effects? Hence, venom. The cure to snake venom isn't anti-poison. Anti-venom :D
What mistakes? I said they had an extremely virulent bite that also happened to be venomous. Seems legit.Quotethey've also got a venom that acts as a coagulant, making its prey bleed out or die from infectionYou may want to read this very carefully for mistakes.
Post by: Flying Dice on November 11, 2012, 12:10:18 am
Does that help?What mistakes? I said they had an extremely virulent bite that also happened to be venomous. Seems legit.Quotethey've also got a venom that acts as a coagulant, making its prey bleed out or die from infectionYou may want to read this very carefully for mistakes.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 11, 2012, 12:11:43 am
You guys.
Are the.
Worst.
>_<
Cheers.
Post by: Flying Dice on November 11, 2012, 12:12:43 am
Post by: Max White on November 11, 2012, 12:17:03 am
Howls Moving Castle
Pretty good movie, right? Well let's take a look at some of the symbolism involved in the movie and what some of the characters represent.
Howl is the 'Ladies man'. He is good looking and mysterious. In the movie, magic is a metaphor for the power of speech, and Howl is about as charismatic as it gets. He is also shallow and vein, spending at least an hour every morning putting lotions on to try and look his best. He is also known for 'Eating the hearts of pretty girls', meaning going out with them until they get attached to him, then dumping them like the jerk that he really is. He is so narcissistic that even his own mother (Role filled by the Queen) worries about what will become of him.
Turnip Head is the 'Best friend' who is in love with Sophie, but he can't tell her. Throughout the movie, he is always willing to help Sophie in one way or another. When Howl gets annoyed at Sophie and she ends up crying out in the pouring rain, it is Turnip Head who holds up umbrella over her, leaving himself to get wet. He loves her too much to ever see her suffer. Yet all he ever does is say nothing and smile. He plays the role of the friend who can never express his feelings because he feels they won't be returned.
So, in the end, who gets the girl? Is it the guy who has verbally abused Sophie when things didn't work out perfectly for him, or the guy who genuinely cares for her? No prizes for knowing that Howl wins this round.
Moral of the story? The jerk always wins.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zrk2 on November 11, 2012, 01:13:17 am
Post by: Neonivek on November 11, 2012, 01:22:00 am
Quote
So, in the end, who gets the girl? Is it the guy who has verbally abused Sophie when things didn't work out perfectly for him
It an anime. Being horrifically abusive is the best way to show you care.
I wish I was kidding but honestly... It is a terrible trend in anime that needs to die a quick death.
Post by: zombie urist on November 11, 2012, 03:53:20 pm
Spoiler: More Stuff (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on November 11, 2012, 03:59:01 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I can explain it. It happened.
As movie logic says
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Flying Dice on November 11, 2012, 04:00:45 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on November 11, 2012, 04:02:03 pm
Obviously.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It's so scientific.
Post by: Starver on November 11, 2012, 05:03:46 pm
I agree with ~90% of what LW said about SkyFall.Spoiler: More Stuff (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: My comebacks on that... (click to show/hide)
[1] Bond, of course, is not an 'Agent'. He's an 'Officer', if anything. To be properly nitpicky about just about the whole oevre of films (I think). (Though I'm not so sure about the books as originally written, because I read those long before I knew enough to be nit-picky about this issue.)
Post by: Neonivek on November 11, 2012, 05:14:38 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
No that makes sense
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on November 11, 2012, 05:26:19 pm
(Not spoiler-tagging, because it's increasingly hard to casually read, but leaving massive amounts of context out of it instead.)
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 11, 2012, 06:01:37 pm
[1] Bond, of course, is not an 'Agent'. He's an 'Officer', if anything.He's a commander in the Royal Navy. So yes, very much so an officer. They don't really explain that side of his duties much. I'm not sure any of the more recent Bond films have him shown as a person in command of anything really.
Post by: Vattic on November 11, 2012, 07:10:42 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
No that makes senseSpoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on November 11, 2012, 07:56:34 pm
Indeed. But more than that, by a number of definitions (though not all, probably muddied by such populist terminology) an "Agent" (a secret one, more so) is "one of 'them' that is working for 'us'" Or even someone of a third party acting on our behalf. Bond is definitely "one of ours, working for us". An officer in the field (from our perspective), or a spy or another related pejorative (from their perspective). He may even be an "illegal", a person going under a false identity for the territory they are in on behalf of their home nation, except for the whole announcing his "name, real name" all the time. ;)[1] Bond, of course, is not an 'Agent'. He's an 'Officer', if anything.He's a commander in the Royal Navy. So yes, very much so an officer. They don't really explain that side of his duties much. I'm not sure any of the more recent Bond films have him shown as a person in command of anything really.
Post by: Neonivek on November 11, 2012, 07:58:00 pm
Post by: Max White on November 11, 2012, 08:18:15 pm
Post by: Starver on November 11, 2012, 08:23:00 pm
I remember back when James Bond was a Secret Agent.The point I was making was that he technically wasn't. Although after so much influencing of language by (possibly) his own example of misnaming it's now become tautologically factual in the same way as <shudder/> "decimate" has been popularly misappropriated.
Looking things up, it looks like US legal terms differ from UK ones that should govern 007's various nomenclatures, though. And I forgot to include the word "operative" as an appropriate synonym under various circumstances.
Anyway, I'm being over-nitpicky, even for a nitpicking thread. Move along. Nothing to see here.
And pretty much nothing to see here, either unless you've changed your lower-forum background colour from the default. ;)
Post by: Kagus on November 12, 2012, 06:08:41 am
And pretty much nothing to see here, either unless you've changed your lower-forum background colour from the default. ;)
Darkling *is* the default, you philistine.
Post by: Bohandas on November 12, 2012, 12:29:08 pm
Post by: Bohandas on November 12, 2012, 12:46:06 pm
Hear me out, I've seen this movie a few times because its part of my cycle of Sci-fi, horror, and monster movies that I watch each year around halloween, and this year it dawned on me:
The film makes absolutely perfect sense if you just assume that Eros (the space alien) is massively incompetent and possibly slightly insane. If you assume he's basically a 1950's version of Invader Zim the film makes perfect sense.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 12, 2012, 01:14:05 pm
The titular simulation from The Matrix would have consumed far more power than the prisoners plugged into it could ever generate.Unless it used their own brains to process it. Like an endless dream. 2spooky.
And was unnecessary to begin with, its stated purpose being far more easily achieved with good old-fashioned chains and shackles.Or drugs. Lots of drugs work too. I guess the thing about that is it doesn't allow for hoomies to escape and restart the matrix. The architect was fond of the virtual world. Must be where he kept his stash.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on November 12, 2012, 01:16:39 pm
Still breaking the second law of thermodynamics. Humans need food if they want to survive (read, produce heat). At best this dream state thing would go on till eternity, but it can't support the robots without creating energy out of nowhere.The titular simulation from The Matrix would have consumed far more power than the prisoners plugged into it could ever generate.Unless it used their own brains to process it. Like an endless dream. 2spooky.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 12, 2012, 01:20:05 pm
Anyway, the humans were in the Matrix to protect them, not to use them for power. The machines either had a bad conception of what humans desired or just didn't care. The Architect suggests the former, as he was unable to make a stable Matrix even after multiple iterations.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 12, 2012, 01:20:42 pm
Food: Soylent greenStill breaking the second law of thermodynamics. Humans need food if they want to survive (read, produce heat). At best this dream state thing would go on till eternity, but it can't support the robots without creating energy out of nowhere.The titular simulation from The Matrix would have consumed far more power than the prisoners plugged into it could ever generate.Unless it used their own brains to process it. Like an endless dream. 2spooky.
Energy: Mother nature is far more efficient than machine at releasing chemical potential energy. Keep a supply of peptides and you should have a massive battery of people fit for any dystopian murderbotlord.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on November 12, 2012, 01:30:41 pm
I haven't seen any movies, but I do believe that the sun was blocked out, and that as such the whole thing will rapidly run out of energy.Food: Soylent greenStill breaking the second law of thermodynamics. Humans need food if they want to survive (read, produce heat). At best this dream state thing would go on till eternity, but it can't support the robots without creating energy out of nowhere.The titular simulation from The Matrix would have consumed far more power than the prisoners plugged into it could ever generate.Unless it used their own brains to process it. Like an endless dream. 2spooky.
Energy: Mother nature is far more efficient than machine at releasing chemical potential energy. Keep a supply of peptides and you should have a massive battery of people fit for any dystopian murderbotlord.
Post by: GlyphGryph on November 12, 2012, 02:11:25 pm
In Universe, the true explanation (in the expanded materials) is that the machines created the matrix in an attempt to be kind. The power source thing was just bullshit the humans would actually believe, instead of the kindness thing.
(although in the original script, they were using them for /processing/ power - basically as a cheap server farm for creative energies. For all their intelligence, the machines are quite dumb - this is they seem to rely on humans for upgrading the system and improving it when they access the source code)
Post by: Vattic on November 12, 2012, 03:04:34 pm
Post by: GlyphGryph on November 12, 2012, 03:08:06 pm
But it's pretty obvious if you watch the movies that the machines certainly don't hate the humans, certainly don't want to destroy them, many of them even likely humanity, and they obviously have certain... intellectual gaps that the humans can fill (although machines such the oracle seem to be better at it than most, even her abilities are limited).
Post by: Flying Dice on November 12, 2012, 03:08:47 pm
GlyphGryph: Would you mind letting me know where you are getting all this from? Genuinely curious to read it for myself :).The same here, I'd like to read this as well.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 12, 2012, 03:11:04 pm
GlyphGryph: Would you mind letting me know where you are getting all this from? Genuinely curious to read it for myself :).He took the red pill.
Post by: Neonivek on November 12, 2012, 03:13:58 pm
Which given that many people complain that the Archetect was "Too complex" I am halfway there to agreeing.
IT SPOKE PLAIN ENGLISH PEOPLE!
Post by: Flying Dice on November 12, 2012, 03:15:08 pm
Post by: GlyphGryph on November 12, 2012, 03:20:18 pm
Post by: Neonivek on November 12, 2012, 03:21:54 pm
Because they overestimated people when the dumbed it down?
And that is sad.
Post by: Korbac on November 12, 2012, 05:34:37 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: LeoLeonardoIII on November 12, 2012, 05:52:31 pm
Post by: Sergius on November 12, 2012, 08:24:49 pm
The "Human beings as batteries" instead of "Human beings as processing units" came about because the creators thought it would go over our heads.
Which given that many people complain that the Archetect was "Too complex" I am halfway there to agreeing.
IT SPOKE PLAIN ENGLISH PEOPLE!
It wasn't "complex", it was the spoken equivalent of "wall of text".
Architect don't like punctuation.
Post by: Neonivek on November 13, 2012, 12:15:37 am
Quote
It wasn't "complex", it was the spoken equivalent of "wall of text".
Nope sorry, but according to the "Everyman" the Architect was just too complex and used too many big words to understand.
Post by: Vattic on November 13, 2012, 02:31:09 am
This surprises me as I didn't hear this complaint from anyone at the time and find it hard to believe I've just been lucky in this.QuoteIt wasn't "complex", it was the spoken equivalent of "wall of text".
Nope sorry, but according to the "Everyman" the Architect was just too complex and used too many big words to understand.
Post by: Neonivek on November 13, 2012, 02:33:12 am
This surprises me as I didn't hear this complaint from anyone at the time and find it hard to believe I've just been lucky in this.QuoteIt wasn't "complex", it was the spoken equivalent of "wall of text".
Nope sorry, but according to the "Everyman" the Architect was just too complex and used too many big words to understand.
I don't think it is true either. Yet whenever I see someone harping on that scene it is basically about how impossible it was to understand.
And no one seems to comment on that scene except to say that... Or "Ergo"
Post by: Max White on November 13, 2012, 02:34:58 am
Post by: Neonivek on November 13, 2012, 02:36:39 am
I think it was just a poorly thought out script, that they tried o salvage post production.
I am not sure if it is a good script done badly.
Or a terrible script done as well as it possible could.
Post by: Starver on November 13, 2012, 05:52:11 am
This may have been raised :Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: This is skyfall... (click to show/hide)
Post by: Mech#4 on November 13, 2012, 06:17:43 am
I've had a thought bugging me for ages about the movie Alien, a tad disgusting but well...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on November 13, 2012, 06:26:40 am
Post by: Starver on November 13, 2012, 07:20:19 am
I think this is the right place for this type of question.
I've had a thought bugging me for ages about the movie Alien, a tad disgusting but well...Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Well, I always thought... (click to show/hide)
@Darvi: I can't get over the "being in the lungs" bit, though. Though my own aforementioned anaesthetising effect (or equivalent) might allow the creature to sequester itself. I'm not as well-read on Alien canon as a friend of mine is, so I might be wildly off the retroactively-applied logic that has now been well established. I may talk to him tonight about that (as we, coincidentally, had skimmed over such canon (w.r.t. to "how bad Prometheus was", in his more critical opinion), the other day).
Post by: Jopax on November 13, 2012, 08:29:46 am
Perhaps the 'hugger probes the body for the safest accessable location before lying the egg, and that's why the process takes so long?
Post by: Sergius on November 13, 2012, 11:43:12 am
This surprises me as I didn't hear this complaint from anyone at the time and find it hard to believe I've just been lucky in this.QuoteIt wasn't "complex", it was the spoken equivalent of "wall of text".
Nope sorry, but according to the "Everyman" the Architect was just too complex and used too many big words to understand.
Likewise, anyone I know doesn't say his stuff is "complex", only that he talks so much without pause and using long words for no reason other than to confuse people and sound smart (or make the Bros. seem deeply philosophical? which pretty much sums Matrix 2 and 3...).
Post by: kaenneth on November 13, 2012, 12:17:42 pm
This may have been raised :Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler: This is skyfall... (click to show/hide)
on the topic of Skyfall...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: GlyphGryph on November 13, 2012, 12:30:28 pm
I think this is the right place for this type of question.
I've had a thought bugging me for ages about the movie Alien, a tad disgusting but well...Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Because it doesn't have to be eating your food to make you hungry, just raising your metabolism. Which it would do by feeding you, making the body think it's incredibly short on energy.
Babies in pregnant women don't directly eat the food from a lady's stomache (they get their nutrition through the blood, same as the facehugger would), but you can bet the amount of calories a pregnant woman needs to consume are going to increase, and their eating habits will likely change thanks to the demands the fetus is putting on them. For a normal human, that's only about 300 calories a day - not really something huge. But babies grow slow. Aliens don't.
Post by: Xantalos on November 19, 2012, 03:29:27 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Mech#4 on November 19, 2012, 05:22:01 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on November 19, 2012, 05:25:21 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Mech#4 on November 19, 2012, 05:41:45 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on November 19, 2012, 06:19:04 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Nulzilcho on November 19, 2012, 07:07:36 am
Spoiler: The Thing (click to show/hide)
Babies in pregnant women don't directly eat the food from a lady's stomach
Great, now this is all I can think about.
Post by: Neonivek on November 19, 2012, 02:51:02 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sergius on November 19, 2012, 02:52:07 pm
There was that part at the end where one of the guys basically merged with the other guy's face but seemed to require some heavy rubbing ;)
Maybe the Thing needs foreplay before doing its Thing? You know, get in the mood and all.
Post by: MorleyDev on November 19, 2012, 04:16:45 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on November 19, 2012, 04:22:26 pm
I kinda thought The Thing was deliberately trying not to show us the specifics of how it's assimilation worked to ramp up the paranoia. It could be a slow take-over from a single cell, or it could require it to be in darkness, or it could be any other number of things. And that none of them (or the viewers) know the specifics make it much more terrifying, because how can you stop something from happening when you don't even understand how it happens?
It actually outright shows you an assimilation as well there are some logics.
It cannot infect you with a touch and it cannot infect you hidden.
Post by: MorleyDev on November 19, 2012, 04:27:37 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sergius on November 19, 2012, 07:56:21 pm
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/the_blue_raja/bbs/the_thing.jpg)
(watch me do the electric bugaloo)
Post by: Jopax on November 19, 2012, 08:11:30 pm
Question is, why didn't he just freeze the flames? Does he not understand how fire works? Is Superman an idiot?
Post by: Sergius on November 19, 2012, 08:16:50 pm
One of the older Superman movies, one with a chemical plant on fire. He needs to keep some acid down or shit turns ugly. Then the firemen get their pump broken so he has to fly to a nearby lake, freeze the top solid and bring the giant piece back to the plant.
Question is, why didn't he just freeze the flames? Does he not understand how fire works? Is Superman an idiot?
Also for some reason the frozen lake conveniently turned back into water instead of just crushing everyone underneath.
Post by: Jopax on November 19, 2012, 08:20:12 pm
Also, programming a weather satellite to turn it into a weather control machine.
Because computers man!
Post by: Neonivek on November 19, 2012, 08:21:51 pm
Post by: Starver on November 20, 2012, 07:13:22 am
Been a while since I've seen it, but my interpretation is that Superfreezingbreath applied to the refinery/whatever may not be so easy to make an "area effect" (and perhaps not even locally without risking blowing stuff around that shouldn't really be), and would need a lot of going over various bits while other bits are still out of control. Get a lake, breath it frozen to your satisfaction (thick enough to lift[1], not so think that it will not notionally melt (yes, a tricky one that) before reaching the target, and let it rain over the entire area at once. Also means that superbreath does not affect the firefighters (who just get wet, instead) that would get caught in the blast. Probably not healthy to them.
Nobody's said anything about the runoff of chemicals, bulked up with all that super-provided water, however... Well, probably they either ignore that in the bad old days of the early '80s(?), or they already have a plan at hand to deal with their normal extinguishing water supply.
The satellite thing... I always imagined that it was actually a Notional Scientific Advisory project and already had that capability under wraps, as well as its public purpose. But I might be reading(/watching) something into that that wasn't even there in the first place, due to the separation of years since viewing
(Ach, 504s even preventing me previewing my edits properly!)
(edit; In fact I must even have posted it into a 504 situation, leaving it in a mess. Making it better.)
[1] Although as an extension to "anything Superman wears is nearly as indistructable as himself[1], it is seen that when he grabs a falling helicopter by the skid and stops its fall very rapidly, it does not just shear off. Strangely, so don't the wings of a jet plane tear off (in the reboot movie) and even the relatively fragile front end just crumples a bit, then the plane is slowly lowered without its back breaking under the unusual load conditions it experiences.
[2] Excepting the occasional damage to Clerk Kent's clothes, of course, caused by substances full of that element 'humorusium'.
Post by: JoshuaFH on November 20, 2012, 05:41:11 pm
Now why can't it just have a small portion infect an organism's body and take it over, albeit slowly if it's such a superior orgnanism? Well, I also hypothesize that since each cell is it's own living thing, but they work together in a kind of hivemind, the larger the mass, the smarter the organism. Parts that are cut away from the larger mass are still functioning to protect themselves, but now they're cut away from the intelligence and can't figure out what to do.
So while it may be EASILY within the ability of just the few cells found in saliva to take over the organism, those few cells are content to just live coexisting with the organism because they're not smart enough to have ambition for the good of their species as a whole.
There could also be inter-cell politics occurring that simply can't be seen, but that's just throwing a wide net in theoryville.
Post by: Kagus on November 21, 2012, 07:28:47 am
Post by: Starver on November 21, 2012, 09:01:58 am
(Which may or may not be how us "proper" multicellular creatures got started. And I'd need to check it up but I suspect that sponges are still in the "either/or" camp and may use this mechanism. I know they're very good at surviving being blended together (with other sponges) and then getting back into their own respective structures again, afterwards.)
But that's a fact (or nearly so, at least), and nothing to do with movies. Mov(i!)e along please, nothing to see here.
[1] Which man can deliberately increase/decrease, once he knows about it, to subvert the natural behaviour.
Post by: JoshuaFH on November 21, 2012, 11:36:59 am
So I also have the hypothesis that to for all the fancy cellular tricks the Thing can pull off, that it need needs to maintain homeostasis in order to maintain any semblance of group plan or order. It also explains why it screams and feels pain instead of just morphing into something else on the fly (it needs to take time to change in order to maintain homeostasis), or why it just doesn't become a giant katamari blob of flesh that just rolls and engulfs, cause it wouldn't be able to maintain homeostasis that way.
/highschoollevelbiology
Post by: Neonivek on November 27, 2012, 11:13:51 am
Anytime a movie includes a "Let the animal decide"
Ever since I have had a pet I realised how rediculous this is as a concept. There are so many reasons why a pet will "walk towards" someone other then their master that isn't that they like the stranger more. I just can never take it seriously anymore.
The only movie that at least was self-aware enough to realise this was the one with a monkey where the boy got the monkey by holding a lizard for it to eat secretly.
Post by: brainfreez on November 27, 2012, 01:07:15 pm
i think that if we would find another life in space , we would try to examine it and learn new things about the universe , instead of destroying it.
the same goes for aliens if they would find us , i think they would want to make friends and exchange knowledge instead of just slaughtering everyone and destroying the planet.
i guess the movie wouldn't be fun without slaughter or fast action , but it seems unrealistic for me.
Post by: Starver on November 27, 2012, 02:14:36 pm
Sometimes the humanoid aliens need respirators (or don't, when we do). But mostly we both do without (or, indeed, nonhumanoid aliens do without), or both need them for this current hell-hole but can survive in each other's sealed and controlled environments. To some extent this can be explained by the planets that both we and the aliens concerned want to use being more likely to be tuned to our mutual survival than not (hence the basic attractiveness), but given the variety of planets there might be that poke one way or another out of the comfort zones of species developed on different home planets you'd think there'd be fewer overlaps! (The jury is out how dissimilar a home planets could be, environment-wise, and still give recognisable alien life, regardless of absolute body-shape. Because we've only got a sample of one, right now. But the more imaginative[2] writers and screenwriters might go for (possibly) chlorine-breathers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masters_(The_Tripods)) or other atmospheric requirements/vulnerabilities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_Earth_(novel)).)
Personally I think that non-recognition of the other species as a direct and deliberate rival (e.g. the Horta) or even total avoidance (e.g. Jovian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheelers_(novel)) natives). But it's challenging to make such concepts the core of a piece of fiction (and I particularly commend Cohen and Stewart's efforts to the house, should you have a chance to read Wheelers or Heaven (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven_(novel)) (that latter page is a bit short on content, however)).
[1] Excepting the odd interstellar nebula/amoeba thing, or the Horta, and of course the beings of the Q Continuum use humanoid (and almost always human) forms as a convention when dealing with Starfleet) but are one of several incorporeal/trans-dimensional beings encountered, and seem to be quite accommodating in this regard.
[2] Or those trying to emphasise "This is an alien, geddit?!?"
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 27, 2012, 02:21:27 pm
Or, y'know, the human immune system might also play a part. A small number of isolated foreign cells might be dealt with and cleaned up quickly enough, but a full-on invasion from a significant mass of cells would overwhelm what the body is capable of dealing with offhand.This would also explain why in the original and the remake, the people we see (not off screen) get assimilated have sustained major trauma or shock, or in the case of the remake, get brute forced into assimilation.
The remake kinda cares less about the science or the terror though, which is a shame. It kinda wanted to conform to the modern horror template; the heroine is invincible and the body shock alone is supposed to be 2spooky4u.
Post by: Xantalos on November 27, 2012, 03:29:31 pm
Post by: Scoops Novel on January 14, 2013, 08:24:47 am
Post by: Greiger on January 14, 2013, 01:02:18 pm
Spoiler: In the off chance someone hasn't seen it (click to show/hide)
Post by: GlyphGryph on January 14, 2013, 02:05:07 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on January 14, 2013, 04:23:40 pm
Post by: Greiger on January 14, 2013, 08:12:43 pm
That and I seem to have a vague memory of the things kinda 'looking' at the window as they passed the plane.
Post by: Neonivek on January 14, 2013, 08:14:44 pm
But they did that whole dig under the ground thing to catch Toomy, that strikes me as intelligent, especially since it seems like they can be assumed to have never needed to develop real hunting skills with everything around them being completely stationary. Seems more of a quick thinking catch rather than instinct.
That and I seem to have a vague memory of the things kinda 'looking' at the window as they passed the plane.
They don't really have eyes.
Also why even catch Toomy they eat everything? If anything that would be the Nitpick right there if that actually happened.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 15, 2013, 01:16:33 am
Post by: misko27 on January 15, 2013, 01:22:05 am
Anyway, one of the biggest problems with aliens in general is that even after all the human bodies and english is taken into account, you're still assuming alot. I mean, these things could be fundamentally different from us. Blue and Orange morality x1000. The concept of consumption or war could be entirely alien. to them. Their ethics or understandings could be as alien as their biologies. And it's hard to imagine that.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on January 16, 2013, 06:03:44 pm
I think you might be thinking a little too hard about this....Overthinking things is the point of this thread.
Also, why are the Na'vi the only vertebrate that don't have a 6-legged body plan?That's why they showed the monkey-things with the bifurcated arms--the idea was presumably that the dual forelimbs merged. (Personally, I prefer the idea that the tetrapodal body plan was the ancestral form of which the Na'vi and monkey-things are the only survivors, with the hexapodal body plan being a later mutation which occurred in a clade which was much more successful. Imagine if mammals had wiped out all other tetrapods on the planet except crocodiles, and then someone wondered why crocs were the only animals without fur and warm blood.)
Where'd you get the idea that Pandora was high-gravity? I always thought it was low-gravity. It makes more sense, and explains the giant flyers, giant space-wood-elves, etc.The entire biology doesn't make much sense. Not even going to try and defend that.A high gravity world of carbon based life forms, and not a single snake to be seen.
WHY AREN'T THEY ALL SNAKES?!!
Maybe the antimatter engines are constructed like a blackbox? Where you can't open the thing up, only use the predefined hooks into the thing. It also means that you're screwed if something happens that you can't solve without opening the engine up, but. ..Actually, that makes sense. That much power, you don't want people playing around with the engines...
Not evil? While amorality != immorality, it's hard to argue that the former can't be evil.I can't help but notice that that colonel guy died right before the end of the movie. I imagine that with him gone, the leadership of the colony was significantly less...violent. Also, the humans had been shown that these peoples' religion just might not be superstition like ours is, and either way, they'd need to pretty much wipe out every trace of macroscopic life on the planet to avoid dying. At that point, they presumably decided it wasn't worth the cost.
Genocide and destruction wasn't their goal, no, but they considered it an acceptable cost. Preeeety sure that falls under evil.
Yeah, I don't think so. A corporation so big has to have loads of politicians on it's payroll. And a sizeable chunk of Earth's workforce, so they're simply too big to fail. Even in the event of them being discovered, there's no real danger of them losing their mining concession.Even though said concession specifically forbade them from doing so? Huh. Laws must work differently in the future if neither the public nor the press nor the government care about that kind of thing.
Quote
As for gunships, rockets etc., they're quite simply more expensive and less effective than a virus. Any rational board of directors would opt for the more cost effective thing.Assuming they had an actual reason to. Which they didn't, when they were sending the expedition out. Remember, travel to Pandora isn't FTL, it's 0.7 c, meaning it takes about 6 years to reach there from Earth.
Huge corporations getting shut down by government, greedy CEOs getting trials instead of golden parachutes? There's fiction, and there's just plain ridiculousness. Have you been under a rock this whole global economic crisis?The global economic crisis didn't involve genocide.
But the article sounds plausible. Seems pretty likely many people would go over to that. I don't think people would be poring over the article looking for discrepancies.We are, and we're just critiquing critiques of a movie, not dealing with a major loss of life and culture of the only other known intelligent alien species. There would be much more than 10ebbor10 looking over that news story...
The real question is why the humans didn't mine the unobtanium in the floating mountains...
I think 28 weeks later got it nicely, how it would work, the only possible way for it to spread effectively would include running zombies, not shamblers, those are way too easy to outrun.In theory. But...to paraphrase Max Brooks, it's like the Tortoise and the Hare, only with hundreds of tortoises and a hare which will probably be eaten alive.
On the subject of zombie movies, RE5 had a big one. Wasn't the Red Queen A. destroyed in RE1 and B. trying to protect human life by stopping the zombies from escaping into the general populace back then too? Then why was she trying to kill everyone?
That changes behavior, no?I might also affect human behaviour, btw.If by affect you mean "cause brain damage" yes
One of the many things that bugs me about the Matrix trilogy is why the machines choose humans as their energy source. Surely other animals or even plants (although I doubt plants could survive in the wasteland) would be more efficient for energy farming and much easier to control than humans.You're missing the point.
The Matrix's proposed energy generation scheme VIOLATES THE LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS. Thank you for a reminder of this major thorn.
whenever i see a movie with aliens and humans fighting each other on a planet , i just want to facepalm .Wait.
i think that if we would find another life in space , we would try to examine it and learn new things about the universe , instead of destroying it.
the same goes for aliens if they would find us , i think they would want to make friends and exchange knowledge instead of just slaughtering everyone and destroying the planet.
i guess the movie wouldn't be fun without slaughter or fast action , but it seems unrealistic for me.
Your problem with this is that the humans and aliens are fighting, period?
1. There's a bit of evidence against your idea. *cough*New World*cough*Xenophobia*/cough*
2. If they did fight with them, why would it be planetside??
Big problem: Stupidity. Most movies that don't have people being complete idiots (and many which do) instead/also have people being inexplicable unstupid (ie hypercompetent).
Post by: Neonivek on January 16, 2013, 07:14:29 pm
Quote
Most movies that don't have people being complete idiots (and many which do) instead/also have people being inexplicable unstupid (ie hypercompetent).
I know this example is from a game but I think it helps this point.
The weirdest thing I ever saw in a videogame and in the end the most surprising was in Metalgear 4 (or 5) where Snake checks a gun for traps using his knife... AND THEN!!! there wasn't any.
I was kinda shocked, in movies and games... characters either know something is a trap or they don't know something is a trap. You rarely see characters act in a way they would need to unless it is immediately beneficial or critically unbeneficial.
-
Also yeah this is a thread about overthinking. It is about taking a detail that 'shouldn't' detract from all the enjoyability of a movie somehow snowballing in your head until it somehow ruins the whole movie.
For example when I complained about School of Rock the moral implications of what Jack Black did is terrible but the movie still functions with it. Yet I can't get around it and I hate the movie AHHHHHHH!!!
At the same time it isn't just about overthinking. It can be a basic flaw. Shakey Cam ruining a movie that was otherwise good? Perfect Nitpick.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on January 16, 2013, 08:03:21 pm
Post by: Flying Dice on January 16, 2013, 09:13:37 pm
Post by: Starver on January 16, 2013, 09:15:33 pm
(Oooh, ninjaed by FD, and now it's not slightly humorous any more... darnit.)
Post by: Flying Dice on January 16, 2013, 09:52:29 pm
Post by: kaenneth on January 16, 2013, 09:52:53 pm
On the subject of zombie movies, RE5 had a big one. Wasn't the Red Queen A. destroyed in RE1 and B. trying to protect human life by stopping the zombies from escaping into the general populace back then too? Then why was she trying to kill everyone?
She was programmed to stop the spread of leaked biohazard (AKA Umbrella's intellectual property) using any means necessary; not to protect human lives.
One of the many things that bugs me about the Matrix trilogy is why the machines choose humans as their energy source. Surely other animals or even plants (although I doubt plants could survive in the wasteland) would be more efficient for energy farming and much easier to control than humans.
They are not an energy source, they are just recovering what energy they can. It was only a rebel theory/propaganda that they were 'Coppertops'. The machines are still bound by the classic 'First Law', which is why they tried to give humans a virtual paradise. Remember, it was the humans who destroyed the environment. The Agents can kill humans because of the implied 'Zeroth Law', they are fighting the rebel terrorists to protect the majority of humanity.
Post by: GreatWyrmGold on January 16, 2013, 11:37:02 pm
Two things. One, the Red Queen's twin in RE3 attributed the same motive as I to the Red Queen. Two, Alice had been purged of the virus by that point. Surely, letting hundreds or thousands of zombies loose in the compound had a higher risk of spreading the infection than letting a single person who the virus had been eliminated from in the previous movie leave?On the subject of zombie movies, RE5 had a big one. Wasn't the Red Queen A. destroyed in RE1 and B. trying to protect human life by stopping the zombies from escaping into the general populace back then too? Then why was she trying to kill everyone?She was programmed to stop the spread of leaked biohazard (AKA Umbrella's intellectual property) using any means necessary; not to protect human lives.
Quote
First off, wasn't my quote; that was a quote by someone else. It's completely stupid to assume that ANY organism could violate thermodynamics in such a way that farming for energy makes sense.One of the many things that bugs me about the Matrix trilogy is why the machines choose humans as their energy source. Surely other animals or even plants (although I doubt plants could survive in the wasteland) would be more efficient for energy farming and much easier to control than humans.They are not an energy source, they are just recovering what energy they can. It was only a rebel theory/propaganda that they were 'Coppertops'. The machines are still bound by the classic 'First Law', which is why they tried to give humans a virtual paradise. Remember, it was the humans who destroyed the environment. The Agents can kill humans because of the implied 'Zeroth Law', they are fighting the rebel terrorists to protect the majority of humanity.
Second off, I still like the wetware theory better. The robots never seemed like they were Three Laws compliant to me--why not just screw with the connections the rebels had to the Matrix?
...How did the rebels even have access to the Matrix?? Is it that hard to turn off the Wi-fi on your world simulator?
Post by: Vattic on January 17, 2013, 03:22:35 am
First off, wasn't my quote; that was a quote by someone else. It's completely stupid to assume that ANY organism could violate thermodynamics in such a way that farming for energy makes sense.
Second off, I still like the wetware theory better. The robots never seemed like they were Three Laws compliant to me--why not just screw with the connections the rebels had to the Matrix?
...How did the rebels even have access to the Matrix?? Is it that hard to turn off the Wi-fi on your world simulator?
Just as an example the first law didn't do much good during the war.
I like the wetware theory better too.
The film also left me wondering why the machines didn't just switch to nuclear power.
Post by: Sheb on January 17, 2013, 04:15:23 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 19, 2013, 05:38:42 am
Yup, low gravity. It's a moon, after all.Where'd you get the idea that Pandora was high-gravity? I always thought it was low-gravity. It makes more sense, and explains the giant flyers, giant space-wood-elves, etc.The entire biology doesn't make much sense. Not even going to try and defend that.A high gravity world of carbon based life forms, and not a single snake to be seen.
WHY AREN'T THEY ALL SNAKES?!!
Quote
Remember, that's a matter antimatter reaction you got going there, with the approximate power of one nuclear warhead/ second. In case of an engine failure you're screwded anyway, because there isn't going to be an engine to repair.Maybe the antimatter engines are constructed like a blackbox? Where you can't open the thing up, only use the predefined hooks into the thing. It also means that you're screwed if something happens that you can't solve without opening the engine up, but. ..Actually, that makes sense. That much power, you don't want people playing around with the engines...
Quote
Looking back at additionall data, I'm pretty sure that at least a limited amount of unobtanium is needed for the survival of the human civilazation. It's the most important component of their fusion generators, which provide the power for the limited terraforming. However, maybe the current stockpile is sufficient. Pretty sure the pesty little humans ain't going to leave them alone.Not evil? While amorality != immorality, it's hard to argue that the former can't be evil.I can't help but notice that that colonel guy died right before the end of the movie. I imagine that with him gone, the leadership of the colony was significantly less...violent. Also, the humans had been shown that these peoples' religion just might not be superstition like ours is, and either way, they'd need to pretty much wipe out every trace of macroscopic life on the planet to avoid dying. At that point, they presumably decided it wasn't worth the cost.
Genocide and destruction wasn't their goal, no, but they considered it an acceptable cost. Preeeety sure that falls under evil.
Quote
They didn't even knew the Na'vi where there when they first landed. The first expedition was a wee bit underprepared.QuoteAs for gunships, rockets etc., they're quite simply more expensive and less effective than a virus. Any rational board of directors would opt for the more cost effective thing.Assuming they had an actual reason to. Which they didn't, when they were sending the expedition out. Remember, travel to Pandora isn't FTL, it's 0.7 c, meaning it takes about 6 years to reach there from Earth.
Quote
They tried. Turns out that the mountains aren't that strong, and can break up quickly when mined into. They didn't try againBut the article sounds plausible. Seems pretty likely many people would go over to that. I don't think people would be poring over the article looking for discrepancies.We are, and we're just critiquing critiques of a movie, not dealing with a major loss of life and culture of the only other known intelligent alien species. There would be much more than 10ebbor10 looking over that news story...
The real question is why the humans didn't mine the unobtanium in the floating mountains...
Quote
Yup. Suprisingly, reverse phrenology actually works.That changes behavior, no?I might also affect human behaviour, btw.If by affect you mean "cause brain damage" yes
Quote
The primary problem with first contacts is that at first the only thing you know about them is that they'll quite probably die if you something at them real fast. There's a gigantic amount of time for translation/diplomatic and other errors. In fact, I'm pretty sure it might take decades before we could even understand each others languages. (Some sort of math's/physics based language thingy might be possible sooner, if the aliens have a similair understanding of maths/physics)whenever i see a movie with aliens and humans fighting each other on a planet , i just want to facepalm .Wait.
i think that if we would find another life in space , we would try to examine it and learn new things about the universe , instead of destroying it.
the same goes for aliens if they would find us , i think they would want to make friends and exchange knowledge instead of just slaughtering everyone and destroying the planet.
i guess the movie wouldn't be fun without slaughter or fast action , but it seems unrealistic for me.
Your problem with this is that the humans and aliens are fighting, period?
1. There's a bit of evidence against your idea. *cough*New World*cough*Xenophobia*/cough*
2. If they did fight with them, why would it be planetside??
Post by: Sergius on January 19, 2013, 11:55:24 am
Yup, low gravity. It's a moon, after all.Where'd you get the idea that Pandora was high-gravity? I always thought it was low-gravity. It makes more sense, and explains the giant flyers, giant space-wood-elves, etc.The entire biology doesn't make much sense. Not even going to try and defend that.A high gravity world of carbon based life forms, and not a single snake to be seen.
WHY AREN'T THEY ALL SNAKES?!!
You can have a moon that's the same size, density and gravity that Earth. Being a moon doesn't automatically make the gravity lower. It was lower in this case, yes. If they don't say it in the movie, I'm pretty sure that Cameron has it written down somewhere (I believe he documented a LOT of canon things about this world)
Post by: Starver on January 19, 2013, 06:33:08 pm
...How did the rebels even have access to the Matrix?? Is it that hard to turn off the Wi-fi on your world simulator?I can't remember exactly how they connect the ships' systems to the matrix data-lines, but there's some reason why they can't move (at least too far away) from the locale they're jacking-in from. As well as the whole "can't go 'dark' until disconnected" thing.
Whether it's a physical link or a short-range (perhaps induction-based) 'remote' connection to the data cables, I can't actually recall before going and having another look at the films.
Also, as revealed in the third film
Spoiler: ...and not assuming here that everyone has (click to show/hide)
Post by: Realmfighter on January 19, 2013, 08:30:13 pm
...How did the rebels even have access to the Matrix?? Is it that hard to turn off the Wi-fi on your world simulator?I can't remember exactly how they connect the ships' systems to the matrix data-lines, but there's some reason why they can't move (at least too far away) from the locale they're jacking-in from. As well as the whole "can't go 'dark' until disconnected" thing.
Whether it's a physical link or a short-range (perhaps induction-based) 'remote' connection to the data cables, I can't actually recall before going and having another look at the films.
Also, as revealed in the third filmSpoiler: ...and not assuming here that everyone has (click to show/hide)
This is why I like the Zion is another layer of the matrix theory. All the stupid things that don't make sense in the narrative but become fully reasonable when you think of the movies as action flicks suddenly become genius, because it would be an in universe action flick.
Using glorified mining machines to fly in against people in Gatling cannon weilding mechs. instead of say, flooding the city with mustard gas? Narratively stupid. Action Movie understandable, giant fights are epic and all that. Zion as a second level of the matrix? Now everyone in Zion wins. They get to live their lives free from the tyranny of the machine. What better way of dealing with the people who would never accept the Matrix and question every glitch than giving them exactly what they want?
Post by: Neonivek on January 19, 2013, 08:39:57 pm
Quote
Using glorified mining machines to fly in against people in Gatling cannon weilding mechs. instead of say, flooding the city with mustard gas?
To my knowledge it is mostly because the machines really don't care to use such tactics because they don't have to.
Post by: Ameablable on January 19, 2013, 08:55:43 pm
Xavier gets crippled at the end of X-men first class, which is the first in the timeline so far, yet at the end of X-men origins Wolverine, he is standing and in a flashback in X-men three the last stand, he is also standing!
cmon people!!
Post by: Starver on January 19, 2013, 08:58:56 pm
"Glorified mining machines"? As far as I can tell, the Squids aren't particularly mining-enabled. That big boring thing (as opposed the bearded boring thing, some might say ;)) was quite the innovation, indeed, but the squids are the standard do-everything form. The main computer has no imagination, and there's not even any T800 infiltrator units. It's just a basic massed-ranks charge by loads of expendable generic units.
Of course, that's also a tactic employed by game AIs, along with the "End Of Level Boss" that also needs to be defeated. But an actual AI could be just as 'brute-forcey'. I don't know. I've not encountered that many apparently malevolent AIes IRL yet. I probably just haven't advanced my skills enough to trigger the necessary plot-events, though. ;)
Post by: Ameablable on January 20, 2013, 09:24:51 am
When the general is working out he says "gotta keep in shape this lower gravity makes you soft" or somehing along those linesYup, low gravity. It's a moon, after all.Where'd you get the idea that Pandora was high-gravity? I always thought it was low-gravity. It makes more sense, and explains the giant flyers, giant space-wood-elves, etc.The entire biology doesn't make much sense. Not even going to try and defend that.A high gravity world of carbon based life forms, and not a single snake to be seen.
WHY AREN'T THEY ALL SNAKES?!!
You can have a moon that's the same size, density and gravity that Earth. Being a moon doesn't automatically make the gravity lower. It was lower in this case, yes. If they don't say it in the movie, I'm pretty sure that Cameron has it written down somewhere (I believe he documented a LOT of canon things about this world)
Post by: Starver on January 20, 2013, 04:01:02 pm
Post by: Flying Dice on January 20, 2013, 04:36:56 pm
Assuming the scientific advisers weren't employed straight from kindergarten, or distracted by shiny objects at the crucial moment, it's also supported by the native life. Spindly and tall, rather than short and squat. And the megaflora (even just counting the individual components of it that are aboveground) is megaflora!This. If Pandora was a high-grav world, the blue space elves would have been dwarfs and there wouldn't have been any giant-fucking-trees.
I'm wondering, was there any explanation for the floating islands other than "it looks so cool"?
Post by: Ameablable on January 20, 2013, 04:39:09 pm
Yea they said magnets. Hence the equipment malfunctioning. Pretty damn strong magnets.Assuming the scientific advisers weren't employed straight from kindergarten, or distracted by shiny objects at the crucial moment, it's also supported by the native life. Spindly and tall, rather than short and squat. And the megaflora (even just counting the individual components of it that are aboveground) is megaflora!This. If Pandora was a high-grav world, the blue space elves would have been dwarfs and there wouldn't have been any giant-fucking-trees.
I'm wondering, was there any explanation for the floating islands other than "it looks so cool"?
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 20, 2013, 04:39:59 pm
Post by: Ameablable on January 20, 2013, 04:44:28 pm
A certain kind of electromagnetic effect. Forgot the exact name. Sadly, they kinda dropped the ball there. In order to completely justify it, there should have been giant lightning sparks, scraps of metal flying about and all sort of stuff.And metal v-tol's probably shouldnt have been able to fly there...
Post by: Sergius on January 20, 2013, 04:47:22 pm
I'm in the "it's just another layer out" camp, but...
"Glorified mining machines"? As far as I can tell, the Squids aren't particularly mining-enabled. That big boring thing (as opposed the bearded boring thing, some might say ;)) was quite the innovation, indeed, but the squids are the standard do-everything form. The main computer has no imagination, and there's not even any T800 infiltrator units. It's just a basic massed-ranks charge by loads of expendable generic units.
Of course, that's also a tactic employed by game AIs, along with the "End Of Level Boss" that also needs to be defeated. But an actual AI could be just as 'brute-forcey'. I don't know. I've not encountered that many apparently malevolent AIes IRL yet. I probably just haven't advanced my skills enough to trigger the necessary plot-events, though. ;)
That's because the Matrix invasion is this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGEZ3NNH6cs).
I don't know why nobody has reskinned that with a Matrix theme...
EDIT: thinking about the "2nd layer" theory, I have come with my own theory: all the "humans" in the Matrix are just another kind of AI, they just live in the 2nd layer, but the TRUE real world that's outside of the computer, they're all just bits of programming residing inside this arcade machine.
It explains everything.
Post by: Scoops Novel on January 21, 2013, 08:12:27 am
Post by: Scoops Novel on January 21, 2013, 10:59:04 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 21, 2013, 11:26:50 am
May i request this is extended to books? That could be fun :P.I would agree with this. Better to broaden the scope than to have the thread kinda die.
Anyway, here's a bit about Darlah, which, supposedly is a science fiction novel. I think the translator had something to do with the idiotness, because the wikipedia synopsis doesn't match perfectly(especially the ending) with what I've read.
Spoiler: Might contain spoilers (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on January 21, 2013, 12:14:37 pm
Post by: Sheb on January 21, 2013, 12:25:48 pm
Post by: Flying Dice on January 21, 2013, 12:29:28 pm
Source?GiYF.
Granted, the 30 trillion megatons came from after-the-fact calculations made by people who weren't involved with the plan. (http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2012/11/26/u-s-planned-cold-war-mission-to-blow-up-the-moon-is-that-even-possible/0) The Cold War birthed a lot of crazy things.
Post by: Neonivek on January 21, 2013, 12:31:45 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 21, 2013, 12:35:00 pm
Honestly Darluh is sounding like a pretty funny movie/novel. I mean the sheer uttar rediculousness of it and the lengths it will go to legitimise things is hillarious!It legitimates stuff?
As far as I've read, the only way it legitimates things is adding even more ridiculous things so that the main plot points seem to make sense in comparison.
Post by: Neonivek on January 21, 2013, 12:38:33 pm
Honestly Darluh is sounding like a pretty funny movie/novel. I mean the sheer uttar rediculousness of it and the lengths it will go to legitimise things is hillarious!It legitimates stuff?
As far as I've read, the only way it legitimates things is adding even more ridiculous things so that the main plot points seem to make sense in comparison.
So it even spirals into a whirlpool of insanity!?! It still sounds pretty funny. It keeps trying to explain things but making less sense.
Post by: Jopax on January 21, 2013, 12:47:49 pm
And how is wasting money on sending teengares to the moon increase funding?
There's stupid, then there's crazy stupid, by the description this book surpassess those two by a longshot.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 21, 2013, 01:13:10 pm
As for fund raising, they are doing it the same way the Mars One guys were planning it. Try to make money of the press conference.
It's not a bad book perse, but it would have been improved a lot if the writer had just dropped the entire moon thingy. Really, it was nice till they launched towards the moon, and from that point on you were just waiting for the astronauts to be murdered. Because bloody hell they were bad at their job. (Another nice thingy, the only weapon on the mission was a single old sixshot revolver, given to the only astronaut they had bothered to brief about the dangers.)
Edit:
Spoiler: Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Edit 2: I also haven't mentioned any of the completely strange stuff. (Ie, where the book doesn't even attempt to justifify). Or really, most of the science erros.
Post by: Scoops Novel on January 21, 2013, 04:31:42 pm
Why does no one, ever, press the doctor as to why exactly the universe needs a race of mark 2 timelords? And if so, why let the earth be perpetually invaded? It's not exactly toughening humanity up in any way they couldn't be without needless deaths. I wouldn't expect the answer to the first one, but you'd think someone would have put two and two together by now?
Post by: Neonivek on January 21, 2013, 04:46:55 pm
As for Novel's second statement... I have no idea what he is talking about. The Doctor doesn't just destroy every race ever because he isn't that malicious.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 21, 2013, 04:48:07 pm
It's a nitpick that may be addressed, but i hope the whole one team of superheroes defeating aliens thing is dealt with. It can be argued that the immortals are also earthlings, and they're dealing with descendants, but they're still far older then we are. To be honest, the whole earth is the the centre of the multiverse thing in Marvel and DC feels a touch ridiculous.
Why does no one, ever, press the doctor as to why exactly the universe needs a race of mark 2 timelords? And if so, why let the earth be perpetually invaded? It's not exactly toughening humanity up in any way they couldn't be without needless deaths. I wouldn't expect the answer to the first one, but you'd think someone would have put two and two together by now?
What series/ book/ movie?
Post by: Scoops Novel on January 21, 2013, 05:00:36 pm
Post by: misko27 on January 21, 2013, 05:08:05 pm
Post by: Neonivek on January 21, 2013, 05:10:42 pm
The issue is that, well, just up and destroying earth would just make the doctor angry. As well there are many galactic treaties that prevent such.
As well there is an impression that it is harder to outright wipe out a planet then you would think. Even the most advanced and warlike races had to spend months or even years planning to take them out (and still failed).
Post by: Scoops Novel on January 21, 2013, 05:21:01 pm
That's it though, bar a few. Those few likely would not appreciate the threat. Seconding that, they're still trying aren't they? Though we have seemed to moved up in class recently. I doubt that they're not prepared to accept massive casualties from a berserk doctor in exchange for stopping the time-lords from returning. On top of that, they also have time travel. The doctor might not like it, but they could and would have plenty of reason to kill them, looking at the time wars.
Post by: Starver on January 21, 2013, 05:24:36 pm
For the first part, I guess The Avengers[/Avengers Assemble, for us in the UK].
The second seems to be some Doctor Who bit of canon that I either don't recognise, or have not seen yet.
Terracentrism is often a concern. When it comes to DC/Marvel Universe stuff I usually imagine that (like with the Green Lantern Corps) there's a lot of other places and times that have planet-threatening battles with other bits of the universe/other universes, but (unless there's a guest human) we rarely get to see a set of macro-scale amoeboid superheroes saving their particular planet from their particular brand of threatening enemies. Or, of course, if we're the threatening enemies.
(As for the Doctor... well, prior to the "Big Bang 2" reboot, we'd (presumably, but not assuredly) lost all other Mark I time lords, give or take The Master (again!), given how slippery he generally is. DoctorDonna could be considered a Mk2, but isn't the same any more. Of course there's Jennie, who I imagine is still out there somewhere, even post BB2, and friends and enemies alike may have been rebooted by the restorative field. I've absolutely no idea what the latest arc concerning Clara's ongoing existence might have to do with this, until April's continuation of this current series. Personally, I think the Doctor is fed up of Time Lords.)
Post by: Neonivek on January 21, 2013, 05:26:21 pm
Quote
I doubt that they're not prepared to accept massive casualties from a berserk doctor in exchange for stopping the time-lords from returning.
Yeah here is kinda the thing. No one is more feared then the Doctor. He has bluffed entire armies and has managed to genocide entire alien species.
An Enraged doctor would be unstoppable and every single member of your race would be absolutely dead!
--
I still want to know how the Timewar went though.
There are so many timelords who should still be alive... yet they havn't explained why they would be dead.
Post by: Scoops Novel on January 21, 2013, 05:36:50 pm
Post by: Neonivek on January 21, 2013, 05:37:33 pm
You have one doctor, or ten billion. Your choice.
Only the doctor involved himself with other species. Otherwise the Timelords existed forever (or never at all)
Post by: Scoops Novel on January 21, 2013, 05:42:47 pm
Post by: Neonivek on January 21, 2013, 05:48:04 pm
I know they explained the human looking aliens in the future away (Humans mated with aliens), but for the past I cannot remember.
Post by: Starver on January 21, 2013, 07:13:07 pm
Post by: Starver on January 21, 2013, 07:44:54 pm
the invisible astronaut"the Impossible astronaut", do you mean?
Quote
told that aliens would rip the world apart for his DNAOTOH, this could have been a ruse (at least when there was a ruse, if it was ever real "first time round") to conceal the trickery involved.
Quote
two humans give birth to a time-lord in the form of river after sufficient exposure to time travelTwo humans conceived one, maybe... Only one actually gave birth. ;) I think that the Hitler episode effectively puts paid to there being a 'proper' new-TimeLord(/Lady), although there could have been. (i.e. something Jennie-like to have happened after the Library episode.)
Quote
It doesn't help that people like the captain have arisen, along with countless other examples of molded humans.Molded? If you mean time-travelling, like Jack, that's... I think... not proper Time Lord tech, the wristband. The Daleks stole timetech from the TimeLords though, back in the early days, so I can't state that for sure.
(Something I've accidentally snipped about the enemies not being efficient.)
The enemies can be efficient, until the Doctor 'happens'. (Or the Tardis. There's sufficient evidence to suggest that she is the subconscious Sam Beckett (or whatever his "God, Fate, or whatever" is, from Quantum Leap) of the whole shooting match, or at least sufficiently so to ensure that key things happen (Volcano Day) and, when key things do not, that they get made to happen, regardless of the Doctor's intent ("Waters of Mars", was it?).) They are indeed apparently 'better' at besting the Doctor when allied, but even then they are imperfect. (First of all, getting their reasoning wrong. Secondly, not being able to out-manoeuvre someone who knows how to get a time-loop paradox to work the way it should. (On the whole, other Time Lords we could mention (the Monk and the Master, among them) tend to try and fight time, but the Doctor does best when he makes the flow work... Although he's said (Eighth Doctor audio episodes) that he used to be a Meddling Monk.
Quote
So that leaves us with the question as to why humans are still alive.It may vary, especially during the time of Gallifrey's (benign?) overseeing of universal affairs, but in Eleventh Doctor times "Basically... Run!" is the message given to anyone from the rest of the universe who thinks they might otherwise interfere. #10 tried to convey the same sort of message with the Sycorax, although whether the humans turned out to be their own worst enemy is something we could discuss.
Quote
why they've been allowed to positively teem across the galaxy in later yearsThat's humans for you "marvellous, wonderful humans!", to paraphrase an often gleeful Doctor (of various regenerations). He might admire other life-forms ("oooh, you're a work of art, you are...") but it seems Humans are his absolute favourite. And although a distinct rubber-face regularity seems to be a part of the ostensibly non-human residents, there's quite a few more Monsters Of The Week that (even prior to the reboot series, Doctors 9+) aren't strictly anthropomorphic than you find in Trek... Although admittedly quite a few are bipedal with a recognisable body-plan and their own particular variation on a visage, and only one major 'Monster' race really departs from that idiom. (But have done ever since episode 2 in 1963! If you ignore the Manhattan episode...)
We could talk about Red Dwarf, you know. Absolutely no Aliens. Which might or might not explain why most non-human (never-human, like the Cat; human-inspired like various mechanoids; human-offshoots like the Gelfs). Actually, what's the Despair Squid? Originally a Terran squid but evolved, or an actual non-Terran life-form? But that's the only example I can immediately think of that might be non-Terran in origin (and, in most of the cases that are Terran, Human-arisen as well).
But then Red Dwarf is an empty universe. Of course there'd be no aliens in a Red Dwarf universe, and generally only humans/human-derived... because it appears there's only the one cradle of life. Compared with this, it's easier to find fault with Trek/Who/Babylon 5 or even Blake's 7 (ostensibly a human-only universe, like RD, except there's notably the race that built the Liberator). Farscape tries to do a decent job (helped by Jim Henson) but falls into the trap of rubber-facedness, augmented by rubber-bodiedness and Yoda-like implementations. The Andromadean 'Maggog' are furry-suits (could be worse, could be better), although mostly it's Human Expansion again (Nietzscheans being human origin, although Perseids appear to not be, and Trance is... well).
The book of Battlefield Earth works with truly alien Aliens. Travolta/whoever took the concept of them and made them prothseticalised human actors though (to get him a part?). And, talking of 'Aliens', the Promethean tale explains humans by a form of panspermia (sanctioned/intended, or otherwise) towards our race.
Although the original Alien series (while heavy on the vaguely anthropomorphic body-plan, which also meshes with the Predator series, especially where these two merge) seems to go by the "life is rare, and disconnected, but heads towards the two-arms-two-legs-and-a-head bodyplan" principle. At least for the space-faring races (which is humans and Predators, if discounting the prometheans), with the attack/breeding/working form of the Aliens themselves either being accidentally so similar or due to influence by their being plucked out of their original homeworld (where they were nothing special, and barely scraping by) to become the sport of the Predators/whoever. I'm not entirely familiar with the extended Alien canon, so I may have forgotten/ignored something that was brought up in a comic series or elsewhere...
I've recommended them before, and I'll recommend them again, though, if you like books... Jack Cohen and Ian Stewart (or vice-versa) wrote "Wheelers" and "Heaven" (or vice-versa, but that way round is as good a way as any to read the largely disconnected books that probably have a non-implied timeline connection in that direction).
I think my conclusion (if I have any) is that it's easier to assume human (or humanoid) prevalence across the universe for live-action fictions, not just lazier. Although that also extends to most animations (including CGI) too, except when it's a specific case of a "space whale" or "space amoeba" or "space wasp". And whilst the likes of Autobots are justified in copying earth-forms for their 'disguises', anthropomorphic tendencies exist in their core forms, too. When it comes to literature, you're not technically stuck with the same conventions, so long as you can convey what you mean on paper. But you have to be dedicated (c.f. Jack'n'Ian, above) to persevere with a believable non-standard bodyform rather than saying "a being taller than a human with a baby-like face" or "like a robotic space-pterodactyl". If you can get away with it by not showing the aliens directly, or having any appearance of an alien be in the form of their choosing that is acceptable to the human observer (2001, Contact), perhaps that 'helps'. But horses (or equinoid equivalents) for courses...
(To respond to yet another ninjaing... An interesting "not-a-human human" in Doctor Who is Adric. A resident of parallel E-Space. Of course, parallel universe, parallel development, right? For a lot of pre-history human-like civilisations I actually rather assume that there's far-future humans that get adrift in time and space. Which is probably lazy of me. And I forgot to mention the Silurians, who obviously arose from the same prehistoric body-plan (thus had the potential to be humanoid), albeit that was the currently extant reptilian line, which makes it curious how so alike us they turned out given that mammals, let alone monkeys, apes and then hominids, had yet to come to prominence. Although, IIRC, originally they were three-eyed, and not either the aquaticly-adapted variant of The Sea Devils nor the lithe Homo Reptilia of the currently repeated incarnations (Hungry Earth, A Good Man..., the Dinosaurs on a Spaceship" ones and the recent Christmas thing).)
((Oh yes, and any Timelord (other than the Doc' or the Mast') that is potentially still alive was obviously on Gallifrey at the time of that Planet's Time-Locking, which means they're either still trapped, or the events of The End Of Time were such that having failed to break out of the trap they no longer exist. Of course, since Big Bang 2 and after the big time mashup that the wedding of River Song was supposed to sort out, they could now exist/not-exist/never-have-existed/whatever... hard to say.))
Post by: inteuniso on January 22, 2013, 01:16:52 am
Post by: Neonivek on January 22, 2013, 01:28:09 am
This isn't real life.
Hardly matters, it not reflecting real life logic can be a pretty big deal breaker for some people.
Heck Jack Black getting away with his HORRIFICALLY DEVILISH PLOT in School of Rock could just be explained that "It isn't real life, obviously he getting in trouble would go against the point of the movie which is that Jack Black is amazing and we needed to appreciate him more... ohh and the kids... who are just foils for Jack Black". Yet I cannot stand that movie, it angers me everytime.
Jack should have got some jail time for that or at LEAST a fine. I had a fake teacher for a single day and he got arrested and his wife got her teaching license revoked.
What he did was morally irreprehensible and would have actually cost the school a lot of money in insurance fees.
Post by: Sergius on January 22, 2013, 09:31:12 am
Although the original Alien series (while heavy on the vaguely anthropomorphic body-plan, which also meshes with the Predator series, especially where these two merge) seems to go by the "life is rare, and disconnected, but heads towards the two-arms-two-legs-and-a-head bodyplan" principle. At least for the space-faring races (which is humans and Predators, if discounting the prometheans), with the attack/breeding/working form of the Aliens themselves either being accidentally so similar or due to influence by their being plucked out of their original homeworld (where they were nothing special, and barely scraping by) to become the sport of the Predators/whoever. I'm not entirely familiar with the extended Alien canon, so I may have forgotten/ignored something that was brought up in a comic series or elsewhere...
I think the basic explanation of Xenomorph (the aliens in Aliens) appearance is that they somewhat resemble whatever species they chestbursted from, mostly the physique while retaining the Giger-ness (http://www.hrgiger.com/) of the creature.
Post by: Starver on January 22, 2013, 10:36:23 am
I tend to be rather traditionalist about such things (and/or easily led by my peers of the time, who tend to be somewhat traditionalist in this regard as well), so you can guess what I think. ;)
Post by: Sergius on January 22, 2013, 12:26:31 pm
I honestly don't know who decides Aliens canon. I'm not even a fan of the series.
I'm not much of a fan of traditionalist "this is the way it's always been, they changed it it's ruined now" thinking either.
From the original 2 movies we never see a Xenomorph that didn't chestburst from a human either, as they exist only as eggs. I suppose any "(dis)continuity" ideas from Fanon come from novels or other stuff I have no idea exists.
Post by: Scoops Novel on January 22, 2013, 12:31:35 pm
Post by: Starver on January 22, 2013, 12:44:09 pm
That is all...
(..except, Novel? Would I even dare to try? The Doctor protects the planet!
Yrs Sincerely,
Herr Osterhagen.)
Post by: Scoops Novel on January 22, 2013, 12:51:06 pm
I'm just irritated at the stupidity of the recent series, ye ken ;).
Post by: Vattic on January 22, 2013, 03:16:29 pm
Of course you can include AvP2 as another (un?)canon example of this happening.AvP isn't considered canon. In AvP Charles Bishop Weyland founded the Weyland Corporation where as in Prometheus it was founded by Peter Weyland. They both die at quite different times too. Admittedly I don't really understand why Ridley Scott gets to decide what's canon or not.
I honestly don't know who decides Aliens canon. I'm not even a fan of the series.
Post by: Sergius on January 23, 2013, 09:51:19 am
- Like, when someone says "you have until XX time to deliver all the presents", what exactly is the Timezone of the North Pole? (Ok, ok, normally this is like whatever United States considers its "main" timezone, or wherever the protagonist's normal friends happen to live. Normally New York, for some reason, seems to be the center of Christmas movies) (I'm also aware that during December the earth is tilted in some angle against the sun, so there's a sunset/dawn, but that has nothing to do with an absolute clock, as this hour would literally change completely around the year... actually, scratch that, as there is no dawn in the North Pole from about october to march)
- They depict this deadline as something that needs to be done in the next 4-5 of hours before dawn. Wouldn't it make more sense that they actually have 24 hours to deliver the presents to the entire world? And they would start with the zone that is about to dawn first. So basically they just need to outrun the Sun, they have something like one hour to deliver presents in each time zone. Instead, they go flying all over the place, something like US->China->France->Mexico->US Again->Eastern Europe->Hawaii->US Yet Again, and they have to do it "before dawn" whatever that means in the World Clock
Post by: Starver on January 23, 2013, 10:20:26 am
[1] Each of which claiming to be more accurate to the Earth's spin, or to celestial movements, or keyed to a given atomic clock.
Post by: Neonivek on January 23, 2013, 11:31:47 am
Quote
They depict this deadline as something that needs to be done in the next 4-5 of hours before dawn. Wouldn't it make more sense that they actually have 24 hours to deliver the presents to the entire world?
In theory this could be explained as having 4-5 hours before you miss houses... or it could be explained as 4-5 hour window within the 24 hours.
But mostly it is just a poorly concieved time crunch.
Post by: Sergius on January 23, 2013, 12:09:31 pm
Haven't seen that, but the truly international measure of time would probably be UTC. (And/or GMT, which is virtually identical to that and all the other slight variants[1], for all intents and purposes, and of course you'd ignore the switch to BST in summer.)
[1] Each of which claiming to be more accurate to the Earth's spin, or to celestial movements, or keyed to a given atomic clock.
Why would the North Pole be UTC? and why is it so important that it's 5AM UTC? The point is to give boys their toys before they wake up at... arbitrary wake up time (5:12 am or something). You can still "make it" to 5AM UTC and fail to deliver at the proper times in different locations, I think.
EDIT: I was going to mention that the International Date Line isn't even at UTC, but I wasn't sure of the relevancy.
QuoteThey depict this deadline as something that needs to be done in the next 4-5 of hours before dawn. Wouldn't it make more sense that they actually have 24 hours to deliver the presents to the entire world?
In theory this could be explained as having 4-5 hours before you miss houses... or it could be explained as 4-5 hour window within the 24 hours.
But mostly it is just a poorly concieved time crunch.
Well, my point is that even 1 hours before <arbitrary deadline> you could have irrevocably missed a few places where it's already dawn. So at 4 AM, you still have 1 hour before missing the deadline, but if you hadn't delivered to somewhere in an earlier timezone, you already failed.
I understand what you mean about the "window" tho, so in essence (let's say you can't start until the whole family is asleep - midnight, being generous), so if the magic sled can't deliver to an entire timezone in a single hour, it can start at the
Still, you can't miss the starting 5 hour window in the first place or you miss dawn... yet you still have 24 hours to go before "time's up".
Post by: Starver on January 23, 2013, 12:58:26 pm
Why would it be anything else? I'm just suggesting that "Zulu hour" is a more logical standard than any other, in the absence of any locality-based cues. Bits of Greenland are UTC+-0 (although that's more because of locale, other bits are up to UTC-4 adrift). Scott-Amundsen base at the south pole uses UCT+12/13 to match New Zealand (IIRC), so some link of that kind might be used, I suppose. (I think there's an Arctic link to Bergen or Oslo's tz, which is probably +1.) What's the ISS? It could be on Houston time (although it's International, so while Mir was probably on Moscow time, that sounds like a bad bias), but it's probably UTC-based, if at all, regardless of the rapid sunset/sunrise cycles they encounter. (The reverse happens for the Mars Rover controllers. They tend to sych their Earthly base, and even their own sleep cycles, to martian 'sols' (about 40 minutes longer than Terran day's), but there are varying schemes in use to cater for this dislocation. And that doesn't apply at all to our own planetary poles, so forget I mentioned it.)Haven't seen that, but the truly international measure of time would probably be UTC. (And/or GMT, which is virtually identical to that and all the other slight variants[1], for all intents and purposes, and of course you'd ignore the switch to BST in summer.)
[1] Each of which claiming to be more accurate to the Earth's spin, or to celestial movements, or keyed to a given atomic clock.
Why would the North Pole be UTC?
Quote
and why is it so important that it's 5AM UTC?Like I said, I've not seen the film. How about we nitpick that idea, though... oh, wait... ;)
Quote
EDIT: I was going to mention that the International Date Line isn't even at UTC, but I wasn't sure of the relevancy.Of course it isn't. It shifts back and forth at different latitudes, to satisfy local geopolitics, but theoretically is at the midpoint of the UTC+-12 transition area.
Anyway, everyone knows how Santa does it (magic!), so anyone else given the job (or a similar one) is undoubtedly similarly endowed with time and/or space-bending abilities. Especially whatever the thing that makes the ratio of chimney/ventilation duct/letterbox/keyhole diameter to Santa-girth a value greater than one...
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 23, 2013, 01:16:00 pm
Post by: Sergius on January 23, 2013, 01:26:16 pm
And even if the North Pole is at UTC -12 (last place to "dawn"), you could still be well within the deadline and still have utterly failed to deliver to certain locales.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 23, 2013, 01:33:13 pm
Note: I haven't seen either of the films
Post by: Neonivek on January 23, 2013, 03:09:58 pm
I can just imagine a news documentary that critcises Santa for bringing toys to starving third world countries when he could easily bring food... or people trying to find out how Santa works as well as how old he is exactly.
Yet I somehow suspect that exists.
Post by: Sergius on January 23, 2013, 03:19:17 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on January 23, 2013, 03:21:30 pm
1: changed the book
2: the tree scene
3: they shrunk Mirkwood.
thats all.
Post by: Starver on January 24, 2013, 05:17:17 am
There's but one explanation. This film took place during the events of The Day the Earth stood still.Either? Oh, they remade it. Haven't seen the new version. But if I remember the former correctly, you'll get no solice out of "The Earth Standing Still", because it's a purely psychological "standing still" of the Earth (or, rather, of its populations, holding their breath as it were).
Note: I haven't seen either of the films
OTOH, there's an SF-ish short story I remember where some guy gets the power of 'miracles', or some way to wish for things and them to happen, no matter what. At some point in his experimentation, or perhaps demonstration of his powers to a friend or colleague (I forget) he decides to make "the Sun stop in its tracks", in the sky... Of course, because the apparent movement of the sun is due to the rotation of the Earth, his will gets translated into "stop the Earth rotating[1]".
The Earth stops rotating[2], but everything on the Earth still has the inertia relevant to the prior state, and everything (presumable less so as you near the poles) is now flung sideways, w.r.t. the now 'stationary' Earth. Our miracle-endowed guy, whilst violently thrown sideways (or violently finds the Earth no longer turning with him) rushes out a mental command along the lines of "whatever else happens, let me be safe!", and so is protected from the worst of the effects, but witnesses the gross destruction he has caused as people and things and buildings and seas and oceans and perhaps the air itself rushes across the face of the Earth, spin-wise, with very little surviving. I think it became one of the moralistic "be careful what you wish for" tales, at that point, because he works out why all this happened and makes one last combined 'wish' that: a) Everything be set back as it should, and b) That he no longer have (or remember having?) the powers.
(I cannot hope to remember the author. It's as likely to be Brian Aldiss as Clifford D. Simak or the rest. Shall we say pre-'70s, and in my mind it could even read like a 1950s SF style, or perhaps earlier, but not as far back as Wells. Tries to put a contemporaneous veneer of "hard SF" onto a basic fantasy plot, though, like they did back then...)
[1] Or, I suppose make it rotate at whatever rate would be 1 revolution per year, but events don't continue long enough to reveal whether the author appreciated this depth.
[2] Or at least grossly alters the rate of it, as per footnote 1.
Post by: Starver on January 24, 2013, 05:26:55 am
I am just going to nit pick The Hobbit for a bit.If that's 'all' (although (1) sounds like it could be a biggy), then you might actually be tempting me to go and see it. ;)
1: changed the book
2: the tree scene
3: they shrunk Mirkwood.
thats all.
(I know there's at least one thread on here about it, but I've left it unread, in case of spoilers. ;))
Post by: Scelly9 on January 25, 2013, 07:24:35 pm
Post by: Ameablable on January 29, 2013, 10:48:09 am
I am just going to nit pick The Hobbit for a bit.Dont forget about the stupid mountains coming to life and fighting scene.
1: changed the book
2: the tree scene
3: they shrunk Mirkwood.
thats all.
Post by: Starver on January 29, 2013, 11:33:47 am
Dont forget about the stupid mountains coming to life and fighting scene.
As long as we can't say that Tolkien stole that idea from Pratchett ('Grandad', in TCOM I think). ;)
Post by: Aseaheru on January 29, 2013, 04:04:43 pm
And i have one for los miserables:
1. They messed up the flags. they where red with black boarders, not solid red.
Post by: Neonivek on February 09, 2013, 10:18:10 am
I dislike it when the solution to a problem could easily be solved by the characters simply talking about it and yet it never happens.
I even watched a show where this Kids mom was a nurse at his school for a week. He solved that problem IMMEDIATELY by just saying that he is embarassed at school and that they shouldn't associate. BOOM! Solved! No 30 minutes of trying to get the mom to quit, hiding from her, or having people laugh at the kid at school.
Mind you I know why they don't just talk. Since that would get in the way of contrived issues or comedy they are trying to force into their plotlines.
Post by: Vattic on February 09, 2013, 11:04:36 am
Spoiler: Hellboy 2 (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sheb on February 09, 2013, 11:58:40 am
Post by: forsaken1111 on February 09, 2013, 12:44:28 pm
Its entirely possible that the crown couldn't be destroyed unless it was joined and deconstructed as a whole. I mean those golems were made of a similar looking metal and they were nigh indestructible.Spoiler: Hellboy 2 (click to show/hide)
Post by: Vattic on February 09, 2013, 01:24:50 pm
That could be true but then the crown was originally willingly broken to stop the army ever being used again. It could have been destroyed then. I think it was how simply and without word it was destroyed in the end that made it stand out to me.Its entirely possible that the crown couldn't be destroyed unless it was joined and deconstructed as a whole. I mean those golems were made of a similar looking metal and they were nigh indestructible.Spoiler: Hellboy 2 (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on February 09, 2013, 05:16:58 pm
I dislike it when the solution to a problem could easily be solved by the characters simply talking about it and yet it never happens.People in real life not communicating and thus causing problems that will haunt them in the future...
Sounds like humanity in a nutshell.
Post by: Neonivek on February 09, 2013, 11:30:22 pm
Neonivek: Admittedly a lot of IRL drama could be avoided if people just got cool and talked to each other honestly. Since it doesn't happen IRL, it's not a stretch to see it not happening in movies.
When the issue is the inability to talk I give it a pass.
For example Angelic Layer's (and anime) entire plot revolved around how none of the characters could communicate with eachother. There is no issue here because that is the problem, that is the hurdle they needed to get over.
When it is "Instead of talking about it, which I have no issue doing or could easily not do in an insulting way, I am going to do some CAARAAAZY hijinks" is when it starts to bug me.
Post by: kerlc on February 10, 2013, 02:33:06 am
Post by: Scoops Novel on February 10, 2013, 12:15:40 pm
To be honest, this smells like a cold war proxy battle to me, which would make sense given the nature of interstellar WMD's, but to be so amazingly sloppy that any alien worth his salt, namely, Christopher, could come to the conclusion i have is a mystery, or possibly a setup. Perhaps they want them to lash out at we primitives to make a point. Who the hell knows. Throw in the idea that he was considering making the next movie a prequel, and the next movies going to be interesting whatever happens.
Post by: Neonivek on February 10, 2013, 12:21:57 pm
Post by: Scoops Novel on February 10, 2013, 12:27:34 pm
Post by: Neonivek on February 10, 2013, 12:37:04 pm
Thus district 9 feels very artificial.
Post by: Scoops Novel on February 10, 2013, 12:40:09 pm
Post by: Jopax on February 10, 2013, 01:08:16 pm
And really guys, is it really so hard to imagine that a corporation can be blinded by greed and personal gain into doing stupid and nonsensical shit that ends up crippling it in the long run?
Post by: Scoops Novel on February 10, 2013, 01:16:06 pm
Post by: Xantalos on February 10, 2013, 01:19:02 pm
Well the first movie placed them there as a stopgap measure since they didn't know what to expect when they opened the movie, and the shanty town was hastily constructed to keep them there until they figured out what to do with them. Years pass and nothing happens because hey, beurocracy, lots of RL examples of it stalling stuff that is rather urgent no need to explain that much. The move that was happening was the next level of containment where they would pretty much isolate the aliens from humans by placing them in a guarded remote area. And also the ulterior motive of getting their hands on as much tech as possible.It's almost like it happens in real life!
And really guys, is it really so hard to imagine that a corporation can be blinded by greed and personal gain into doing stupid and nonsensical shit that ends up crippling it in the long run?
My god. They're smarter than they appear.
Post by: Neonivek on February 10, 2013, 01:30:35 pm
They transported this into the modern day real life without the things that allow this sort of thing to happen.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 10, 2013, 01:31:42 pm
Now I'm wondering why the portal into space didn't start sucking atmosphere into the void.
Post by: Neonivek on February 10, 2013, 01:44:43 pm
I watched Avengers yesterday for the first time.
Now I'm wondering why the portal into space didn't start sucking atmosphere into the void.
Gravity
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 10, 2013, 01:56:08 pm
But the portal didn't open very far up...I watched Avengers yesterday for the first time.
Now I'm wondering why the portal into space didn't start sucking atmosphere into the void.
Gravity
Post by: Neonivek on February 10, 2013, 01:58:33 pm
Afterall it isn't like they just shot bombs out of that portal until everyone was dead.
However this is the same logic as "Why don't people who are transported in startrek get hurt by the air, dust, and other particles?"
Post by: Aseaheru on February 10, 2013, 02:41:17 pm
Post by: Neonivek on February 10, 2013, 03:13:39 pm
cuz they ARE those particles.
I don't understand this reasoning.
Post by: USEC_OFFICER on February 10, 2013, 03:46:03 pm
Post by: Neonivek on February 10, 2013, 03:47:25 pm
I believe that Aseaheru is implying that the air/dust/particles turn into the people who get transported in Star Trek. That's just my guess though.
Ohhh, which would make sense.
Post by: Starver on February 10, 2013, 05:27:36 pm
The de-materialising person has their original matter engulfed in a sub-space field, dragged (via a 'storage drum', in the case of dematerialising from a transporter pad) into a stream of particles that travel through subspace towards the destination and (again via a storage drum, where the destination is (also?) a pad) collated and re-cohered at the destination in the original shape[2]. The stream contains matter and its associated energies (in fact, I think it's been used to transport energy-only creatures as well), thus the reconstruction is identical in consciousness[3].
You can get a good range for pad2pad transportations, because you use the capabilities of each pad (that 'storage drum' - around which the 'transporter pattern matrix', or whatever they're calling it in any given iteration of the series, whirls while it's being de-cohered for sending or readied for re-cohering after receicing) to ensure a clean de-materialising and re-materialising process. To overcome the problems of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, a vital part of the equipment is the Heisenberg Compensator. (IIRC, when asked by an enquiring fan how it worked, the producer/writer involved replied "Very well, thank you...") Early iterations (Enterprise. NX-01's show) may not have had this at first, or perhaps a lesser version. It was a big thing when it became man-rated, but still mostly used only at times of great need.
For trips from pad to non-pad or non-pad to pad, the capabilities of the transporters involve projecting the (de-/re-)materialising fields to the remote location, which means a reduced capability of range (also the single drum/HC involved means more work needs doing to keep/restore coherence. It's also possible to do site-to-site (both non-pad) transportations, but that really involves a site-to-pad (or at least the drum container) then rebroadcasting back out to the destination. That's complex. For outward journeys, I always used to imagine that the firing of the stream through sub-space was done so as to degrade from this path at just the right point (for each and every element of the stream) so as to enter normality in the intended configuration, but that's like a totally insane version of the guy toting a huge pile of bricks (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lV-iP1jSMlI) (and he dropped one!), and I'm sure something more 'sensible' involving a projected reconstruction field is involved (and would more easily explain inwards journeys).
With the pattern in the drum, we've seen that there are some 'basic' things that can be done with the transporter pattern. There's a 'biological filter' that does the job of plucking out undesired pathogens (most of the time, there are times when this has failed, mostly due to the nasty stuff being of a novel type) from the stream, meaning that a returning Away-Team member is not bringing back anything undesirable. This can be retasked, as well as enhanced to remove a previously unknown threat, once the threat has been suitably analysed. Also there's the capability to detect powering-up weaponry (or even the presence of unauthorised phasers) within the stream and remove/modify the constituents of the stream that are involved so as to disable these (or even remove the weapons entirely, but TOS liked powering them down the most, IIRC). But that's got to be really complicated, in actuality, given how a 3D configuration of every source particle (not counting the additional momentums/etc that you'd be conveying) is squeezed into a 1D stream, all going round in a blender-with-attitude.
And when a pattern has degraded/lost mass or something and the systems reconstitute a traveller as a juvenile version of themselves, that's not a simple thing, either, and nor is its reversal once the plot allows this technical feat to be accomplished properly... But far better than emerging without limbs, organs or other problems, so with that kind of power behind the stream-management system no wonder everyone (well, except for people like Howlin' Mad Barclay) tends to trust their workings so implicitly.
Oh yeah, and there's been long-term continual recycling of streams to keep people 'in transportation' (Scotty's appearance in TNG, although his companion's pattern did not survive long enough, but that it was possible at all was a typical Scotty-miracle), and then there was the creation of 'Thomas' Riker (the matter must have been doubled), and ever since TOS there's been transportation between realities (Mirror Mirror, and TNG/etc representations). Compared to that the extension of Transporter Technology to allow movement between Delta Quadrant and Alpha Quadrant (via a handy wormhole, wasn't it? ..or I might be mixing up my episodes... but there was a problem with time-displacement in the one I'm thinking of[4]) was a really trivial development!
But, you know, I can't remember how they deal with the shoving of the originally-occupying air out of the way of the re-materialising person or object (or prevent an explosive in-rush of air into the gap left by the de-materialising one). "Arrangements Are Made", I imagine. A little bit of tractor-beam technology, perhaps, or simultaneously switching the matter in/out (and perhaps subtly integrating into/harvesting from the surrounding area, if not simultaneously switching destination atmosphere to the source location). Although we've seen "partial rematerialisation within bulkheads", on very rare occasions in the set of series, when things went more doolally. When there's a risk of this happening (usually sub-space interference, but other technobabble may be mentioned) special beacons are often used, placed around the target of the person(s) they're trying to transport. I believe part of the magic of these devices is that they're constructed to be "reference" targets. When you can interrogate the stream and find out how these outlying items have been translated through the transporter-interfering phenomenon, you can use this information to fine-tune the handling of the rest of the stream of everything else that's being sent, to compensate accordingly.
Which is not to say that it's "easily explained", but a lot of the handwavium has been spelt out (or at least attempted to have been), for this series. Even if it's only in a form that's really an extra-thin shell or veneer of handwavium on top, so as to give it a plausible shape and texture. Still, if you prod it, it may still dent somewhat. ;)
[1] We're talking a couple of decades of subsequent canon, though, I think. And I may have some details wrong. For the authoritative' information on this I suggest you find the Star Trek wiki, which is doubtless fully populated by all the available canonical information, by fans that are far more Trekier or Trekkerier than myself. All the above is just memory, and thus doubtless incorrect in a number of ways. Not the least through any subsequent retconning that happened whilst I wasn't looking.
[2] Normally. Sometimes an originally sitting 'transportee' can arrive standing, in TOS especially, but that shouldn't happen. And of course there are plenty of "transporter malfunctions" of varying (usually plot-related) degrees.
[3] Although there's debate, especially among the Barclays of the Trekkiverse, whether you've been killed at one end and only a copy (with false memories) is being reconstructed at the other end. Technically it's supposed to be the same material (and energy), I think, but it's still a valid philosophical solution. No wonder there's Transporter Psychosis. ;)
[4] Just realised I am mixing up my episodes. There's a Voyager episode where they get communications (through a wormhole) with a ?Romulan? science vessel, from pre-treaty times, but the transporting episode definitely involved Barclay having (despite his own fears) the engineering capabilities to create the more physical link.
Post by: Lightningfalcon on February 10, 2013, 09:48:31 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on February 10, 2013, 09:56:11 pm
-massive snp-All I could think about when reading this is how many test animals they went through to figure this out.
Post by: Aseaheru on February 10, 2013, 09:59:33 pm
Post by: Vattic on February 10, 2013, 10:04:21 pm
Drowning is relativity painless.Which is what I was always told, but having met people who had to be fished out of water and brought back to life I know better. The two people I know who nearly died drowning both said breathing in the water made their lungs feel as if they were burning.
Post by: Xantalos on February 10, 2013, 10:05:07 pm
I can sorta second this.Drowning is relativity painless.Which is what I was always told, but having met people who had to be fished out of water and brought back to life I know better. The two people I know who nearly died drowning both said breathing in the water made their lungs feel as if they were burning.
Post by: misko27 on February 10, 2013, 11:54:39 pm
Shooting yourself in the head with a gun isn't as sure a thing as many people think it is. You can, in fact, miss the important parts. There is a ten percent chance you will live in complete and total agony for the rest of your long miserable life. Everything from facial nerve destruction to reduced cognition.
Now this is a depressing topic, so let's move away.
Post by: Reelya on February 11, 2013, 01:17:18 am
Shooting yourself in the gun isn't as sure a thing as alot of people think it is.
No, shooting yourself in the gun is rarely fatal. (also spell check is reminding me that "alot" isn't a word, "a lot" is correct).
Post by: misko27 on February 11, 2013, 01:20:17 am
This thread is not nitpicks in other people's spelling, grammer, or one can only assume if you could hear me pronunciation.Shooting yourself in the gun isn't as sure a thing as alot of people think it is.
No, shooting yourself in the gun is rarely fatal. (also spell check is reminding me that "alot" isn't a word, "a lot" is correct).
Although I will note my spelling skills have degraded considerably recently. I think it might be my keyboard.
Post by: Neonivek on February 11, 2013, 02:20:32 am
Though since I posted I should probably think of a nitpick that ruined a movie for me.
The Hunger Games
(I wonder if I mentioned it already)
No real spoilers here but in the Hunger games the hunger games are gambled on. This is something they added for the movie that wasn't in the books. Now this may not seem like a lot but to me it actually creates the largest flaw in the entire movie. If the Hunger games are intentionally manipulated and openly manipulated then the presence of gambling, OFFICIAL gambling, is something that simply cannot exist. The existance of official gambling would mean that people would desire a certain degree of fairness.
I know I saw a show that had gambling on a gameshow where there was a lot of manipulation behind the scenes... but what it was based upon wasn't (Who would kill who basically) and the cheating aspects were hidden from the public, and the gambling was mostly unofficial and likely illegal anyway.
Post by: Vattic on February 11, 2013, 03:02:28 am
Post by: Neonivek on February 11, 2013, 08:29:23 am
I haven't seen the film or read the books but I figure it's worth mentioning that some official betting sites/shops let you bet on WWE and similar.
Seriously? that is one of the dumbest things I ever heard... but I don't doubt what you said.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 11, 2013, 12:53:30 pm
No real spoilers here but in the Hunger games the hunger games are gambled on. This is something they added for the movie that wasn't in the books.Are you sure it wasn't in the books?
I remember the participants being sponsored by a bunch of people, who could drop them supplies.
(Haven't seen the movie, by the way.)
Post by: Loud Whispers on February 11, 2013, 01:04:46 pm
It's the being taken out of water that sucks after breathing it.Drowning is relativity painless.Which is what I was always told, but having met people who had to be fished out of water and brought back to life I know better. The two people I know who nearly died drowning both said breathing in the water made their lungs feel as if they were burning.
Post by: Aseaheru on February 11, 2013, 03:11:20 pm
There was unofficial betting and official donating money to buy incredibly expensive items.No real spoilers here but in the Hunger games the hunger games are gambled on. This is something they added for the movie that wasn't in the books.Are you sure it wasn't in the books?
I remember the participants being sponsored by a bunch of people, who could drop them supplies.
(Haven't seen the movie, by the way.)
sponsoring.
Post by: Muz on February 15, 2013, 02:47:03 am
Drowning is relativity painless.Which is what I was always told, but having met people who had to be fished out of water and brought back to life I know better. The two people I know who nearly died drowning both said breathing in the water made their lungs feel as if they were burning.
Agree with this. Actually heard an interview from someone caught in a tsunami, she said that drowning was one of the most agonizing experiences of her life. Though I think it was more horrifying that when you're struggling to breathe, you instinctively suck in more air, and end up sucking in more water. It's so bad that it's used as a torture method.
Maybe asphyxiation from running out of oxygen and passing out is painless, idk. But I'm pretty sure having water in your airways hurts.
(I know others said this, but this is the nitpicking thread after all)
Post by: Neonivek on February 15, 2013, 01:50:27 pm
Post by: Akura on February 15, 2013, 02:24:09 pm
Ohh I think it was just a joke anyhow for laughter then a berration. Though I am probably just projecting because that was pretty funny.I thought gambling was in the book.
Though since I posted I should probably think of a nitpick that ruined a movie for me.
The Hunger Games
(I wonder if I mentioned it already)
No real spoilers here but in the Hunger games the hunger games are gambled on. This is something they added for the movie that wasn't in the books. Now this may not seem like a lot but to me it actually creates the largest flaw in the entire movie. If the Hunger games are intentionally manipulated and openly manipulated then the presence of gambling, OFFICIAL gambling, is something that simply cannot exist. The existance of official gambling would mean that people would desire a certain degree of fairness.
I know I saw a show that had gambling on a gameshow where there was a lot of manipulation behind the scenes... but what it was based upon wasn't (Who would kill who basically) and the cheating aspects were hidden from the public, and the gambling was mostly unofficial and likely illegal anyway.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on February 15, 2013, 11:17:53 pm
I know this is for young children but one part enraged me for some reason.
Basically you know how in really old disney films the princesses seemingly charmed all the animals?
Well this movie/show wanted to explain how that worked so one of the animals who can speak to the princess main character says that the reason animals do that is... They are hungry and they wanted food.
NO DISNEY! NO! The reason the animals huddled around Snow White, Aurora, and Cinderella was not because they were hungry and wanted food, which they never got ANYWAY, it was because they were so pure of heart, such good people, that even animals saw their true nature became enthralled with them. You are NOT going to turn all those animals into food grubby creatures who only helped them because they THOUGHT they might get something out of it.
In a time when a character whos character major character trait is being a "good and virtuous person" is a bad thing and being pure of heart is akin to being an alien. I'd prefer my Pure Hearted characters to be untainted by these reimaginings. It is like everyone forgot what it means to try to be a good person.
Post by: Loud Whispers on February 15, 2013, 11:42:57 pm
Post by: Neonivek on February 16, 2013, 12:43:10 am
Because that is almost never done anymore. Stories are always about trying to teach us how terrible people are and how everyone is a terrible evil person.
Post by: penguinofhonor on February 16, 2013, 06:01:01 am
Post by: Scoops Novel on February 16, 2013, 07:21:02 am
Ok a kids movie (that turns out was a pilot for a show) made by disney called Princess Sophie.
I know this is for young children but one part enraged me for some reason.
Basically you know how in really old disney films the princesses seemingly charmed all the animals?
Well this movie/show wanted to explain how that worked so one of the animals who can speak to the princess main character says that the reason animals do that is... They are hungry and they wanted food.
NO DISNEY! NO! The reason the animals huddled around Snow White, Aurora, and Cinderella was not because they were hungry and wanted food, which they never got ANYWAY, it was because they were so pure of heart, such good people, that even animals saw their true nature became enthralled with them. You are NOT going to turn all those animals into food grubby creatures who only helped them because they THOUGHT they might get something out of it.
In a time when a character whos character major character trait is being a "good and virtuous person" is a bad thing and being pure of heart is akin to being an alien. I'd prefer my Pure Hearted characters to be untainted by these reimaginings. It is like everyone forgot what it means to try to be a good person.
Come on, that's hyperbole if you give it some consideration. They've obviously had problems with children mimicking Snow White and the rest without realizing what animals are in it for. As for pure hearted characters, Incorruptible pure pureness makes not for a interesting story, characterization or immersion.
This isn't really a plot hole or anything, but Django Unchained was so Atticus Finchy. If there's one thing I've learned from pop culture, it's that black people are completely incapable of overcoming their hardships on their own. They always need a benevolent white person there to help them.
I mean, yeah, there were some white people like that in history. But we've got great biographies of black people teaching themselves to read, buying their own freedom, and so on. In movies there's always got to be a white person there for that to happen.
I swear, someday I'm going to see a movie about Malcolm X and he's going to have a white best friend that inspires him or something.
I wouldn't complain about Atticus. His role does makes sense. My complaints about Django Unchained would be making what looks like a action/comedy movie about slavery. A lick of realism would be nice. I don't know about Lincoln, but i doubt that gave a particularly balanced view either.
Post by: Neonivek on February 16, 2013, 09:26:42 am
Quote
Come on, that's hyperbole if you give it some consideration. They've obviously had problems with children mimicking Snow White and the rest without realizing what animals are in it for. As for pure hearted characters, Incorruptible pure pureness makes not for a interesting story, characterization or immersion.
That isn't true. If anything being pure of heart is one of the biggest weaknesses you can have. It means that you are beyond hatred and that no matter what happens you can see the goodness in people. There is easily an interesting story in just that premise alone especially if they are in an imperfect world or if the issues aid themselves to that situation.
Especially since "Black Hearted" isn't considered "boring" it is just handled much better some of the time. While people who are "Pure of Heart" tend to be made into side characters with few exceptions. Few very notable exceptions.
As for Pure Hearted Main characters being bad. Winnie the Pooh is pure of heart (Heck I believe Piglet is also Pure of Heart as well... I love Piglet). Mind you Pooh is big hearted and Piglet is kind hearted... or maybe they are both kind hearted and Pooh is also big hearted.
Also your reasoning has one major flaw in terms of the animals. The show is asking her to FEED the animals. Something you especially don't do.
Post by: Scoops Novel on February 16, 2013, 09:51:01 am
Post by: Neonivek on February 16, 2013, 09:53:07 am
There's a difference between good, and incorruptible pure pureness. Winnie could make mistakes, was greedy for honey, etc, but a fundamentally good character.
Yes but nothing could ever make Winnie the Pooh ever hate someone or do something to knowingly hurt another.
That is Pure of Heart and in a way incorruptible as well.
Of course a "absolutely flawless character" can be boring. But I am talking about the Pure of Heart.
Post by: Greiger on February 16, 2013, 10:06:46 am
Post by: Neonivek on February 16, 2013, 10:19:36 am
Why do I suddenly feel like I've jumped into a Kingdom Hearts forum?
I don't know... Kingdom Hearts tends to say "Light" a lot more then it says "heart"
Post by: Loud Whispers on February 16, 2013, 11:27:30 am
Would that mean... that... Disney was trying to say, originally, that people are inherantly good?-That concepts of good and evil do not exist unless we make them so.
Post by: Vattic on February 16, 2013, 11:44:18 am
Post by: DJ on February 16, 2013, 12:44:48 pm
It is in fact SO torturous that when swimming you are sometimes advised not to physically help someone who is drowning, if they can save themselves, because people who are drowning will uncontrollably pull you down.The way I heard it you're supposed to start the rescue with a full strength punch, to stun the drowning man a little so he doesn't take you down with him.
Post by: Sergius on February 16, 2013, 02:53:25 pm
Ok a kids movie (that turns out was a pilot for a show) made by disney called Princess Sophie.
I know this is for young children but one part enraged me for some reason.
Basically you know how in really old disney films the princesses seemingly charmed all the animals?
Well this movie/show wanted to explain how that worked so one of the animals who can speak to the princess main character says that the reason animals do that is... They are hungry and they wanted food.
NO DISNEY! NO! The reason the animals huddled around Snow White, Aurora, and Cinderella was not because they were hungry and wanted food, which they never got ANYWAY, it was because they were so pure of heart, such good people, that even animals saw their true nature became enthralled with them. You are NOT going to turn all those animals into food grubby creatures who only helped them because they THOUGHT they might get something out of it.
In a time when a character whos character major character trait is being a "good and virtuous person" is a bad thing and being pure of heart is akin to being an alien. I'd prefer my Pure Hearted characters to be untainted by these reimaginings. It is like everyone forgot what it means to try to be a good person.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvmmVXIbYm8
Post by: Loud Whispers on March 16, 2013, 02:21:50 pm
He tries to get the Naa'vi to let some engineers dig up some generic sci-fi minerals, peacefully. Three times. On the fourth after Jake Sully finishes being incompetent again he tries to get them to move non-violently, only ever using weapons that harm their tree home after the smurfs try killing them. Quaritch's move to blow up their Tree-God only happens after 2000 warriors show up at the border of the colony.
I don't see why this is supposed to be the BBEG. If he actually does show up in the sequel (somehow), happy days for humanity all round.
Post by: Xantalos on March 16, 2013, 03:13:15 pm
Oh man, Miles Quaritch from Avatar. What a lad.He'll be cloned. I think on /tg/ he was designated a HERO OF THE IMPERIUM.
He tries to get the Naa'vi to let some engineers dig up some generic sci-fi minerals, peacefully. Three times. On the fourth after Jake Sully finishes being incompetent again he tries to get them to move non-violently, only ever using weapons that harm their tree home after the smurfs try killing them. Quaritch's move to blow up their Tree-God only happens after 2000 warriors show up at the border of the colony.
I don't see why this is supposed to be the BBEG. If he actually does show up in the sequel (somehow), happy days for humanity all round.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on March 17, 2013, 11:40:51 pm
When I watch the movie, I always think of him and his marines as the good guys.
Post by: NobodyPro on March 18, 2013, 02:29:46 am
Post by: Neonivek on March 18, 2013, 02:32:23 am
I want to see re-cut a version of the home tree scene that makes the marines look heroic.
"The Tree has a gun and it is pointed at that school bus full of school children, Nuns, and Kittens!"
Post by: Sheb on March 18, 2013, 09:44:49 am
Post by: Neonivek on April 02, 2013, 02:25:41 pm
Diplomatic Immunity
I've never seen diplomatic immunity used correctly. It isn't immunity to the law but an immunity to the laws of the land.
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 02, 2013, 02:30:13 pm
Quaritch is an amazing dude.
When I watch the movie, I always think of him and his marines as the good guys.
This is actually the way basically everyone I know interprets the movie. I mean, come on - This guy runs out into poisonous atmosphere to try to take pistol pot shots at the bad guys. He pilots a construction mech to do battle against a hostile alien life form (just like in Aliens!). He's all around loyal, a dedicated bad-ass, and from all appearances an effective and well liked leader (by those not staging coups).
He's an antagonist, but it would be trivial for him to fill the role of protagonist just as easily, and most people I know were really rooting for him to win in that final battle.
Post by: Xantalos on April 02, 2013, 02:36:04 pm
And he's being cloned to come back. He's like a male Ripley.Quaritch is an amazing dude.
When I watch the movie, I always think of him and his marines as the good guys.
This is actually the way basically everyone I know interprets the movie. I mean, come on - This guy runs out into poisonous atmosphere to try to take pistol pot shots at the bad guys. He pilots a construction mech to do battle against a hostile alien life form (just like in Aliens!). He's all around loyal, a dedicated bad-ass, and from all appearances an effective and well liked leader (by those not staging coups).
He's an antagonist, but it would be trivial for him to fill the role of protagonist just as easily, and most people I know were really rooting for him to win in that final battle.
Post by: Sheb on April 02, 2013, 02:47:26 pm
and why are they selling tham? When you have an army of supersoldier, you just take the money, not trade it for...
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 02, 2013, 02:54:37 pm
I just watched the last Games of Thrones episode, and what's with the super-soldier? You can't just walk into a supermarket and buy an army of übersoldiers that are super-loyal and don't feel pain.They are slavers. They profit, a lot, without the cost of ever having to go to war. They're soldiers, little more. It's one of the saddest depths of grimdarkiness in A song of fire and ice.
and why are they selling tham? When you have an army of supersoldier, you just take the money, not trade it for...
In any case they're not actually that great of fighters. It's just that they never stop drilling. Great soldiers, bad warriors. Slavers bay is also surrounded by not much to take money from. They'd have to invade one of the slaver cities that they frequently trade with, or else invade the Dothraki sea which is not a smart idea. Mainly because not only do they trade with the Dothraki and get lots of free slaves from them, but they would lose most all of their army in a protracted campaign against a khalasar in its home country.
*EDIT
In short, they're the first organized army in that universe.
Post by: Sheb on April 02, 2013, 07:07:28 pm
Post by: Culise on April 02, 2013, 07:24:21 pm
Well, then who do they sell them to when you don't have protagonist coming by with ships full of gold?Well, the whole area's normally politically disunited among squabbling city-states, and political backbiting in the whole Game of Thrones 'verse is all sorts of bloody even compared to real life. Presumably, they sell to the cities or to prominent wealthy merchant lords, who then use the armies on each other, or possibly to protect against Dothraki raiders. Basically, this would put the slave armies as an unholy cross between Mamluks and condottieri. Once you sell off the army, you go and gather some more slaves, and make another army to sell again. Just like most condottieri only rarely tried to conquer the cities of Italy outright (people like Sforza being an exception), the slaver lords aren't so willing to kill the goose that lays the golden egg for a single meal of fois gras.
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 03, 2013, 12:44:48 pm
Well, then who do they sell them to when you don't have protagonist coming by with ships full of gold?Five warring city states with plenty of silk, spice and silver or gold to give.
*EDIT
There are also four other cities that buy them, in addition to wealthy merchants just buying them for bodyguards. Also the whole "feel no pain stuff" is caused from them drinking a whole cocktail of poisons every day (one of the contributing reasons for them mostly not surviving training) which is most definitely causing them permanent nerve damage and making sure they do not get sick. Along with a whole set of other side effects, but the slavers do not care as long as it does not impact their soldiery.
Post by: Il Palazzo on April 03, 2013, 12:49:39 pm
I love the film to pieces, but this one bit buggers me every time I rewatch it.
Post by: Xantalos on April 04, 2013, 03:16:51 am
In my endless depths of bored trawling the Internet, I found a whole fricking write up on the topic. (http://www.yoursciontc.com/forums/87-off-topic/62412-unsung-hero-avatar.html)Quaritch is an amazing dude.
When I watch the movie, I always think of him and his marines as the good guys.
This is actually the way basically everyone I know interprets the movie. I mean, come on - This guy runs out into poisonous atmosphere to try to take pistol pot shots at the bad guys. He pilots a construction mech to do battle against a hostile alien life form (just like in Aliens!). He's all around loyal, a dedicated bad-ass, and from all appearances an effective and well liked leader (by those not staging coups).
He's an antagonist, but it would be trivial for him to fill the role of protagonist just as easily, and most people I know were really rooting for him to win in that final battle.
On a forum dedicated to owning Scion TC's, no less.
Post by: Neonivek on April 04, 2013, 07:10:10 am
Anyone else thinks that the "1 coin to race" scheme in Wreck-it Ralph is a tidbit unsustainable?
I love the film to pieces, but this one bit buggers me every time I rewatch it.
In a gameworld? If anything coins should be just about worthless.
Post by: Il Palazzo on April 04, 2013, 07:29:53 am
They obviously weren't, as each avatar could get a coin only by winning the race. Which costs coins to participate.Anyone else thinks that the "1 coin to race" scheme in Wreck-it Ralph is a tidbit unsustainable?
I love the film to pieces, but this one bit buggers me every time I rewatch it.
In a gameworld? If anything coins should be just about worthless.
Post by: Neonivek on April 04, 2013, 07:47:21 am
They obviously weren't, as each avatar could get a coin only by winning the race. Which costs coins to participate.Anyone else thinks that the "1 coin to race" scheme in Wreck-it Ralph is a tidbit unsustainable?
I love the film to pieces, but this one bit buggers me every time I rewatch it.
In a gameworld? If anything coins should be just about worthless.
Just hop over to Mario World and take some of his, he has plenty.
Post by: Il Palazzo on April 04, 2013, 07:49:46 am
Post by: Neonivek on April 04, 2013, 07:50:36 am
Yeah, because stealing from Italian mafia never goes awry.
Ohh they are just a bunch of mushroom heads.
Post by: Max White on April 04, 2013, 07:54:23 am
Anyone else thinks that the "1 coin to race" scheme in Wreck-it Ralph is a tidbit unsustainable?Nope, this was addressed in the movie as I recall.
I love the film to pieces, but this one bit buggers me every time I rewatch it.
They won coins during the day races, thus would amass enough coins in a day to last a while. The problem is that if you have no coins to start with, you can never get into the qualifying race to get into the day races to get more coins.
Post by: Neonivek on April 04, 2013, 07:58:52 am
Post by: Max White on April 04, 2013, 08:00:25 am
Post by: Il Palazzo on April 04, 2013, 08:02:25 am
Post by: Max White on April 04, 2013, 08:05:01 am
The qualifying race was at night when the arcade was closed, and the winners would be the characters on the roster for the races for that day when the kids were actually playing.
Post by: Il Palazzo on April 04, 2013, 08:08:10 am
Somehow I got in my head that it was the only way to get coins. But of course this is consistent with getting coins for winning any race, so there.
Now I can love the film unconditionally. Cheers.
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 06, 2013, 09:14:00 am
And it only took the studying of their viral marketing campaign to understand just how many questions without answers there are.
Post by: Xantalos on April 06, 2013, 11:04:54 am
Prometheus. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpEx7pdp2-Q)I remember that movie!
And it only took the studying of their viral marketing campaign to understand just how many questions without answers there are.
Post by: Il Palazzo on April 06, 2013, 11:09:20 am
Prometheus. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpEx7pdp2-Q)See, when they don't teach people evolution in schools, even Prometheus starts making sense.
Post by: NobodyPro on April 06, 2013, 07:34:59 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on April 08, 2013, 11:12:15 am
See, when they don't teach people evolution in schools, even Prometheus starts making sense.
Maybe they're teaching Evolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_(film)) in schools. ∴)
Post by: Il Palazzo on April 08, 2013, 11:25:15 am
Come to think of it, the black goo was kinda similar to Head&Shoulders...See, when they don't teach people evolution in schools, even Prometheus starts making sense.
Maybe they're teaching Evolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_(film)) in schools. ∴)
Post by: Neonivek on April 10, 2013, 10:26:08 pm
And frankly it was pretty good and quite realistic. Terrible things happened and governments made mistakes but it seemed to be the kind of mistakes they would do by being overtaxed.
Yes the premise on how the pandemic even occurred drove me nuts.
Ok in New York they just saw someone die of Small pox in the hospital... They KNOW it is small pox, they have consultants that it is small pox, and they have no idea where it came from.
They have the option to shut down transportation to stop, or limit, the spread and they decide not to because "we don't know it is small pox"
Look Movie... I am not a doctor, I am not a scientist, I am even the guy who thought Small pox killed through infection (Boy was I wrong, only the least deadly small pox does that)... but even "I" can tell what small pox is. CLOSE THE STUPID TRANSPORT SYSTEM!
It ruined the entire movie because every second I go back to "If only New York didn't have idiots in charge"
Post by: Greiger on April 11, 2013, 09:10:58 am
Spoiler: The ending of Wrath of Khan (click to show/hide)
@Neonivek Probably because shutting down the transportation system would effectively shut down new york and cost the city millions, if not billions of dollars. People do stupid stuff when money is on the line.
I really would not be surprised if that it exactly how it would play out.
Post by: Sergius on April 11, 2013, 10:00:38 am
Post by: Starver on April 11, 2013, 11:21:00 am
Ok I'm probably going to be way off here because I'm not a trekkie.Spoiler: The ending of Wrath of Khan (click to show/hide)
It's a long time since I've seen that (despite it being a "rule of even numbers" good one to watch, in that particular film series). The more meta-explanation is of course that during the filming of WoK they didn't know they were going to be doing that. (When they asked the appropriate cast-members how they might accomplish the intended actions for the sequel, IIRC someone said "remember that off-script improvisation...? ...well, I was thinking...", or similar.)
Less meta, it can't be a common thing that happens (something available for the brightest, best, or just plain luckiest of the society), so it either might not be common knowledge, or not at the front of anyone's mind. Even (especially?) a cold, hard, logical one. Also, it needed the end of WoK and SfS events to ensure the 'vessel' was lined up.
Quote
Either "forces of creation" helped feather-bed it, or as it was planet-bound (a change from the usual sun-bound trajectory of such things in such futuristic rituals, or else to get totally lost in the vastness of inter-stellar space), perhaps they didn't want it to crash and smash, and send indignified vaguely identifiable bits and pieces all over the landscape. Nor 'bomb' the pristine landscape with any pyrotechnic element to the payload (or the remaining potential in the capsule's drive system). The drive might therefore be tasked to allow a more leisurely (less combat-related) path with enough left over to give a vaguely soft and dignified landing.Spoiler: ...continuing (click to show/hide)
There are other problems, I can think of. Bit, like I said, it's been a while since I've seen it so I'm not going to make myself look sillier than I already have done.
Quote
@Neonivek Probably because shutting down the transportation system would[...]In light of the above context, first misread that as "...the Transporter system..." ;)
Haven't seen the film, but I imagine someone is thinking "but is it really smallpox (as opposed to many other poxes, or pox-like conditions)? And if I shut the system down, panic ensues financial repercussions, rioting, etc, and then it turns out not to be, then I'm kissing my [political?] ass good-bye..."
Post by: Sergius on April 11, 2013, 03:38:06 pm
Or was it a probe? Same thing really.
Post by: Neonivek on April 11, 2013, 04:10:29 pm
Post by: Starver on April 12, 2013, 02:37:04 pm
I am aware that politicians do some REALLY stupid things... but would they really not do the proper epidemic procedures if they saw Small Pox in a hospital and had experts say it was?I don't doubt that some might. Whether saner heads might raise their voices in public (or 'leaked, off-the-record') dissent is another matter, and then its a slanging match of dubious benefit[1].
(It also works the other way around... 'experts' announcing that a vaccine is unsafe, even when that's pretty much discredited by the majority of other experts, and this could result in far worse health consequences. So who do you trust to publicise/censor such news? And what happens if both sides shout loudly?)
[1] With the worst-case scenario that no quarantine is raised (when it might need to have been), but still there's an early panic (that might yet be baseless) with all the travel chaos that this causes. Damned if you try to flee, possibly damned if you don't. Playing the odds, I'd probably be looking to either flee[2], or barricade myself up somewhere for the duration, all the while fearing an imminent Scorched Earth policy by desperate military authorities.
[2] I already have several "Zombie plague fallback positions" in mind, dependant on what travel options I have open to me. My own house is low on the list and there as a backup only.
Post by: Greiger on April 12, 2013, 04:18:30 pm
if fishing tackle and or tools inaccessible/damaged
{
Sporting goods store and or Home depot
}
Step #2 Get into car
if car inaccesible/damaged
{
Steal a car from the dozen used car lots down the street.
}
Step #3 Steal solar panels from local advertising computerized billboards.
Step #4 Get to the library at city island (Small urbanized island in the middle of a seawater river) Barricade library.
Step #5 Fish for food, use solar panels for electricity, play DF and Cataclysm on library computers. Read library books to learn how to desalinate seawater.
I am aware that politicians do some REALLY stupid things... but would they really not do the proper epidemic procedures if they saw Small Pox in a hospital and had experts say it was?A good portion of them might convince themselves that they caught it before it spread and that there is no need to shut the city down, no matter what experts tell them. The kind of people in charge of such positions are often also the people that ignore anyone that dosn't agree with them. (Not to say they all are, but there will be some)
Post by: i2amroy on April 12, 2013, 04:24:09 pm
Read library books to learn how to desalinate seawater.It's a pretty simple process actually. The basic idea is that you evaporate/boil the water and then condense it onto another surface where it falls into a collector. This can be done with something as simple as plastic wrap, a big and small bucket, and a rock or with much more complicated machinery, but that's the basic idea.
Post by: Greiger on April 12, 2013, 04:36:17 pm
But bunkering up in the library gives me the resources to learn anything vital I might need to know that I don't know. Like if odd looking puffer fish #4 I caught is poisonous, how to maintain a solar panel or make pipe rifles and stuff of that nature.
It's like the internet, only heavier and with fewer cat videos and porn.
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 12, 2013, 05:31:57 pm
Yes the premise on how the pandemic even occurred drove me nuts.Not Madagascar enough. Did they sanction a quarantine at least?
Ok in New York they just saw someone die of Small pox in the hospital... They KNOW it is small pox, they have consultants that it is small pox, and they have no idea where it came from.
They have the option to shut down transportation to stop, or limit, the spread and they decide not to because "we don't know it is small pox"
Look Movie... I am not a doctor, I am not a scientist, I am even the guy who thought Small pox killed through infection (Boy was I wrong, only the least deadly small pox does that)... but even "I" can tell what small pox is. CLOSE THE STUPID TRANSPORT SYSTEM!
It ruined the entire movie because every second I go back to "If only New York didn't have idiots in charge"
Post by: Neonivek on April 12, 2013, 07:13:40 pm
Quote
Did they sanction a quarantine at least?
No. It wasn't until there was an uncontrollable widespread epidemic (because some dummy chose not to limit its spread by limiting transportation) that they decided to do anything.
Post by: Xantalos on April 14, 2013, 10:11:25 pm
What happened to all the supervillains after the heroes were driven into retirement? The only reaswon the heroes were there in the FIRST PLACE was to stop the villains. And yet several years after the heroes depart, supervillains aren't exerting a tyrannical dictatorship over the city, there's no giant craters in buildings from the maniacs...what happened to them?
Post by: Max White on April 14, 2013, 10:19:16 pm
~ 90% of super villainy was in fact to try and get revenge on some super hero for some petty crime and it just escalated over some time from car jacking to wanting the destruction of the entire city. When the super heroes went away, the villains just didn't really care. It was never about running the city, it was about getting even with the privileged few who get to strut about calling themselves heroes when they were just fucking with people who had no other choice.
~ For the other 10% there was police forces and such to take care of it.
Neither of these two things were in any way indicated in the movie, they are just constructs of my mind to make the movie actually make more sense.
Post by: Starver on April 14, 2013, 10:44:59 pm
Arguably the Superhero Relocation Act (or whatever it was called) prevented the vigilantism[2] enough to reduce the loose cannons and loose cannonballs and let the Normal agencies and authorities deal with it all. Repairing damage by the stray supervillains that didn't get immediately caught, rather than cleaning up after each and every superhero/supervillain ding-dong.
But it's been a while since I've seen the film, so ICVWBW. ;)
[1] Or not. They both may take the Batman route to superpowers. Use technology and machines. (ICVWBW here, also. Same caveat.)
[2] Spill-chucker, what? "Vigilanteism"? "Vigilante-ism"? YKWIM.
Post by: Max White on April 23, 2013, 01:51:54 am
Anyway, the great big twist at the end is that the virus isn't spread by the army of the twelve monkeys, despite a clear motive being established, instead it is spread by some jerk named Dr. Peters. Except this is the first time Peters has any sort of plot relevance and there is no motivation given at all. None. It is not only a twist for the sake of loltwist, it makes the plot less coherent than if they had of just let the audience roll with what they had in mind.
Plotfuckery destroyed an already crappy movie just so we could have a slow motion scene in an airport. Welcome to the 90s!
Post by: Neonivek on April 23, 2013, 02:05:18 am
Post by: Il Palazzo on April 23, 2013, 04:45:14 am
12 Monkeys hateYou're a heretic and you shall burn in hell.
Post by: Max White on April 23, 2013, 04:50:31 am
Post by: Starver on April 23, 2013, 06:55:52 am
Spoiler: ...in this spoiler (click to show/hide)
[1] Where are those temporal verb forms I need... Never mind.
[2] Although I am a fan of Quantum Leap. Consider me inconsistent in this. (Although I could argue all sides in the argument over whether Sam is nudging 'his' old history into 'ours', or whether he's been undoing the Evil Leaper meddlings from the start, etc... Depends what mood I'm in and if I've seen a particular episode recently. ;) )
Post by: Max White on April 23, 2013, 07:01:07 am
What I'm annoyed about isn't the time loop, it is the fact that Peters motivation for wanting to destroy the human race was never explained. In fact they didn't even explain how Railly recognized Peters, as she spots him before Cole. Cole might have a chance of knowing him from seeing the same events in his childhood, but Railly wouldn't.
The time stuff is fine, I get that easily. But the end is actually full of plot holes.
Post by: Tiruin on April 23, 2013, 07:38:54 am
Post by: Starver on April 23, 2013, 07:42:42 am
Don't worry, I've both read Homestuck and watched Dr. Who. I can do a stable time loop pretty easily.
What I'm annoyed about isn't the time loop, it is the fact that Peters motivation for wanting to destroy the human race was never explained. In fact they didn't even explain how Railly recognized Peters, as she spots him before Cole. Cole might have a chance of knowing him from seeing the same events in his childhood, but Railly wouldn't.
The time stuff is fine, I get that easily. But the end is actually full of plot holes.
I'm just saying (at length) that I don't think Peters' motivation is the point. It happened.
I considered mentioning something like that episode of Bablyon 5 (one of the few without time-travel in it... ;) ) called "A View From The Gallery". A 'breakout story', of sorts, the plot follows the station mechanics/maintenance men (Mac and... Bo/Beau?) around B5 during a crisis. The crisis is happening, and M&B are involved (definitely helping the efforts, on at least a couple of occasions) and interact with what is happening, and make comments intended to interact with the fourth wall. But the battle is a background. The cause behind the Hostiles' actions is incidental, although is given a reasonable justification through some secondary (but, outside this episode, normally primary) characters' overheard/witnessed dialogue.
To that end, I feel free to give Peters (again, if he's the 'incidental antagonist', as I'm assuming) a reasonable justification of him just being crazy enough... And has the means. (If he had had a different means he would have done that, instead. If he lacked any sufficiently/potentially civilisation-ending means he could have gone all Boston on a more limited target. Or stewed in a fugue of his own making until dying, unhappy and friendless.) The result is not so vague. It happened, caused chaos, loss of reliable records from which the surviving/recovering future civilisation drew in order to (mis-)target their mission. Not an intentional effect... And the cause, or the motivation to the cause, is... Sir Not-Appearing-In-This-Film.
This isn't a plot hole. It's a "do we need to explain everything?" fact that 'is'. How did the younger version of Peters get to school? Did he walk, or take the schoolbus? Was he home-schooled? The answer might explain something (various different susceptibilities to various possible bullies, or chance to be a bully himself... and/or perhaps he had time to think... muse... stew, even... while on his own), but need not be included if (in some people's opinions, at least) the character's intentions can be painted by their on-screen actions...
(Maybe there's a film or series of films out there (conceptually!) that covers how things got into that state, and how it progressed... Leaving 12M, retrospectively, as a 'breakout' film, just like M&B had their moment in the spotlight, against the background of B5... I see that as potential in the superset of all possible films, not as a hole in the subset of this one film's plot.)
The Railly spotting bit? No, can't remember enough fine detail within the movie to comment. You can have that point, in lieu of me having any immediate idea about it. Could have arisen due to a capricious cutting-room-floor incident. ;)
fakeedit @Tiruin: Wasn't when you posted... But I think I've said all I really can say about 12M. Very little of which needed to be said anyway, methinks... There'll be something new coming up in a while, though, I'm sure, whether I'm involved or not!!!
Post by: scriver on April 23, 2013, 04:07:48 pm
Post by: Max White on April 23, 2013, 05:54:38 pm
I mean fuck they had time travel to work with, it would have been easy to send Cole back to one point and have him cause something to happen to Peters to explain his actions, and would have fit in with the theme of the film. They even made an effort to show how unreliable time travel is! But instead we get plot dickery.
Or you know, even better, they showed at the start that prisoners were being forced to go on very dangerous surface runs. What if Peters was actually from the future, sent back for the same reason as Cole, but decided to fuck humanity as revenge for his crappy living conditions? Now that would have been satisfying.
Post by: Neonivek on April 23, 2013, 07:34:52 pm
The "True Self Lesson" Beauty pageant ending.
What sort of made me really understand how terrible this ending was, was oddly enough a recess episode. Basically the premise to these endings is as such. Character, usually female, enters a contest that has a very strict code of conduct (usually a beauty pageant) that requires makeovers, vocals, and ways of saying things.
They enter it and are winning but when it comes to the ending speech they reveal that... They weren't the sort of person who likes what they do in these pageants and they would rather be doing something else or look different. They of course win on the premise that "The winner of this contest should be someone who just be's herself".
Why do I have a problem with it? Because NONE of the other contestants ever project anything short of 100% honest belief in the contest and its way of life. In Recess Spemony beats the Ashleys with that speech and I just went "Wait a minute? The Ashleys act like that all the time. They were being their selves just fine and didn't join this contest as just a farce."
It kinda donned on me that the real premise of those episodes seems to be less "be yourself" but rather a mean spirited jab at beauty contests. Which I admit I don't like them... but a lot of that hate seems to be directed to the contestants who are portrayed as "fake".
Mind you, Don't think this ending ONLY affects this kind of movie. Sister Act 2 also had that ending where her team won because they were "True to themselves and everyone else was fake". Winning with improv where it was clear that the other teams in fact worked MUCH harder then they did and didn't have huge talent discrepancies (especially the team to beat).
----
Ugh you know what! How about just when a movie ends where it feels like the team who won, won because of superficial reasons.
"Ohh we did a slow song, that means our song was much more meaningful"
Me: "ARE YOU KIDDING!?! that other team blew you out of the water. Sure it was fast and up tempo but their vocals and Choreography were spot on. Heck your dance only made sense from the camera's perspective, from the audience you look stupid!"
DANG it I nitpicked Highschool musical (and a ton of other movies)
Post by: Starver on April 23, 2013, 09:52:08 pm
What we have is a temporal play on top of a standard (if extraordinary, in its own way) world-event. And I like the fact that the film is about the 'humble' ontological paradox that is a side-show in the grand scheme of things[1], even while the world turns in (apparent) independence. Albeit going all wobbly with it, but in a consistently Novikovian way.
[1] There's a lot of good fiction out there that (like "A View From The Gallery") focusses on the side-story. Add in a CTC and I'm laughing!
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 08, 2013, 02:50:51 pm
Unmanned AI vehicle gets hit by lightning, and it's neural net goes haywire. Starts downloading the internet and stuff like that.
Commander decides he wants it back in the fight as fast as possible.
Rather than taking the sane option (wipe and reinstall from back up), the plane goes in the air with a corupted AI. Predictable results happen.
Edit: Though it's a fairly good film in that it doesn't portray the AI as stupidly evil for no reason. It just loaded up a hypothetical strike scenario against Russia.
Post by: Lightningfalcon on June 08, 2013, 03:54:29 pm
WHERE THE HELL IS THERE POWER ARMOR!? And why are they grouped so close together? In the book Rico was afraid that 1 mile apart would risk friendly fire!
Second thought- WHERE ARE THERE AWESOME WEAPONS THAT REQUIRE THEM TO BE A MILE OR MORE APART?
Then came the scene with the Morality instructor, whose name I remember but can't spell. Ok, at least they include this. Maybe to movie won't be so bad after all. Noooooope. Instead of talking about how they could hole a conference on whether violence solves things with Hitler, Napolean, and others, he says they should hold it with the city fathers of Hiroshima. to me, this changes it from talking about how violence stops evil to violence shoudl be used to murder civilians.
Then comes the recruiting office. In the book I felt like it was almost completely empty. In the movie it is packed with people. In the book, the recruiting officer told them why they shouldn't join, and was completely missing three limbs. In the movie he encouraged them, and had two limbs. Then, later in the book, the main character meets the recruiting officer again, where he has three fully functional prosthetics, saying that he took them off to scare people off from joining.
Another thing is that not once did I hear talk about WHY you needed to join the federal service to vote and hold power. In the book it explains that this is so you know what responsibility is.
Then comes training. The fight scene had a completely different tone to it. In it, it seemed like the trainers were needlessly cruel, and Zim just wanted to beat up the recruits in a fight. Then came the talk about how you needed different levels of response to a threat, or rather a lack of that talk. Zim, instead of explaining why you needed to be able to throw a knife, and later telling him to just aim in the general direction, throws the knife at the recruits hand. At this point I just stopped watching the movie.
Post by: Bdthemag on June 08, 2013, 04:12:53 pm
Post by: Xantalos on June 08, 2013, 04:14:28 pm
If you go into Starship Troopers expecting everything to make sense, and for there not to be cheesy stupid things in the plot, then I don't know what you were expecting.Honestly.
Picture this as an alternate universe.
Where everyone is stupid.
Post by: Mictlantecuhtli on June 08, 2013, 04:16:20 pm
Post by: Lightningfalcon on June 08, 2013, 04:16:52 pm
If you go into Starship Troopers expecting everything to make sense, and for there not to be cheesy stupid things in the plot, then I don't know what you were expecting.They could of easily done cheesy stupid things. But, at the very, very least, give them power armor. Or, you know, combined arms tactics. Like a tank. Give them a tank. Then they can use that to run up to the bugs and hit them with their swords, or whatever the mobile infantry tactics are.
That's a valid enough point. This is a universe where people are to stupid to consider having armor that a bug can't easily peel apart.If you go into Starship Troopers expecting everything to make sense, and for there not to be cheesy stupid things in the plot, then I don't know what you were expecting.Honestly.
Picture this as an alternate universe.
Where everyone is stupid.
Or maybe this is an AU where hollywood is put in charge of stuff. That I can accept.
Post by: Delta Foxtrot on June 08, 2013, 06:34:32 pm
-Starship Troopers Movie-
That's the issue right there, you watched a Paul Verhoeven film and expected it to be not-Paul Verhoeven film. The guy is an anti-fascist Van Horn of Hollywood and it was never even an option that he would make a film with the same look and feel that the book had. Yes it would have made sense for the MI to use all those things you mentioned, and that's precisely why they didn't.
Post by: Sergius on June 08, 2013, 06:52:58 pm
In Starship Troopers movie, marines zerg-rush YOU!
EDIT: Just in case, I'm not saying that the movie is a super ethical brilliant parody fun happy comedy time. I think it's a rather crappy movie, and probably would have been better to stick to the original instead. And I'm one of the people that think if the book was serious about only having military people vote, then Heinlein was a shithead (I read somewhere that what he thought in reality was the opposite tho).
Post by: Il Palazzo on June 08, 2013, 07:02:43 pm
Post by: Lightningfalcon on June 08, 2013, 08:03:40 pm
It's pretty clear to someone that has even cursory familiarity with the book and writer, that the movie itself is nearly a satire of the book. Book is pro-military, sorta, while the movie is making fun of that. It's not even very subtle, with all the ridiculous We Want You ads, and bug anal probing.I remember seeing somewhere that Heinlein there was some other service that you can serve in, don't remember what it was, but that was how 95% of citizens got their citizenry, and only 5% was in the military. And in the military, only a very small percentage was actually infantry who did fighting.
In Starship Troopers movie, marines zerg-rush YOU!
EDIT: Just in case, I'm not saying that the movie is a super ethical brilliant parody fun happy comedy time. I think it's a rather crappy movie, and probably would have been better to stick to the original instead. And I'm one of the people that think if the book was serious about only having military people vote, then Heinlein was a shithead (I read somewhere that what he thought in reality was the opposite tho).
Post by: Sergius on June 09, 2013, 01:07:03 am
Making veterans vote is no different to make only parents vote. When only a group you decide, even on ACTUAL merits, can vote, just means that they'll always vote things that will favor them and to hell with the other riff raff.
"Hey how about we make a law amendment so that people that aren't veterans can vote" "100% no, 0% yes". :P
Nitpicks that ruined Books... lol... anyway, Power Armor > Ridiculous amounts of Cannon Fodder.
Post by: Neonivek on June 09, 2013, 03:32:34 am
Quote
Making veterans vote is no different to make only parents vote. When only a group you decide, even on ACTUAL merits, can vote, just means that they'll always vote things that will favor them and to hell with the other riff raff
That is why they are doing it. They very subtly create a second class out of soldiers.
Post by: Krevsin on June 09, 2013, 08:46:34 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 09, 2013, 08:50:36 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sheb on June 09, 2013, 09:35:32 am
Post by: DJ on June 09, 2013, 09:53:36 am
Post by: zombie urist on June 10, 2013, 04:32:36 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on June 11, 2013, 12:20:15 am
Where there would be real evidence even without psychic predictions to convict them.
Which come to think of it is contrary to the point of the movie somewhat.
As well since the precog thing never predicts the reason for the crimes, they could easily fall apart in court.
Post by: kaenneth on June 13, 2013, 01:32:43 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Some of the people from TWA flight 800 that broke up in mid-air died by drowning...
Post by: Sappho on June 13, 2013, 02:17:32 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Capntastic on June 17, 2013, 07:30:57 pm
I don't know if this has been mentioned or not, but even after all this time, this one still bugs me. I love the BBC Sherlock series. I love it so much. But the end of that first episode... (Don't read the spoiler if you haven't seen it. Aside from this massive plot hole and a few other minor ones, the show is pure brilliance.)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You can't win a game after the game ends.
Post by: Sergius on June 17, 2013, 10:11:21 pm
I don't know if this has been mentioned or not, but even after all this time, this one still bugs me. I love the BBC Sherlock series. I love it so much. But the end of that first episode... (Don't read the spoiler if you haven't seen it. Aside from this massive plot hole and a few other minor ones, the show is pure brilliance.)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You can't win a game after the game ends.
He already had chosen his pill before the game ended, so all he needs to do is commit to it, and analyze both, and decide whether he won or lost, without dying.
I guess the thing is, there was no adrenaline rush or whatever over knowing if he was right or wrong after there was no danger to him.
Post by: zombie urist on June 18, 2013, 02:31:57 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 18, 2013, 02:39:09 pm
Post by: Simmura McCrea on June 18, 2013, 02:42:22 pm
Well, haven't watched the series, but how sure are you that there was a safe pill?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sergius on June 18, 2013, 02:45:46 pm
They never explained how he made all the victims choose the poisonous pill.
Well, they weren't THAT many victims, were they? 3 or so (less than 6?), it could be "luck" (like playing poker) and they weren't very sophisticated people so probably they all fell for the same crap.
Well, haven't watched the series, but how sure are you that there was a safe pill?Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Maybe he spent the last few years building up an immunity to iocane powder...
Post by: Aseaheru on June 18, 2013, 02:51:49 pm
And if it was I know where its from.
Post by: Neonivek on June 18, 2013, 03:29:31 pm
A magician for example knows what cards you are going to pick before you do so. Most card tricks are just outright cheating.
Post by: zombie urist on June 18, 2013, 04:01:28 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on July 12, 2013, 03:10:26 pm
Spoiler: Immortals (click to show/hide)
Post by: Jopax on July 13, 2013, 08:49:19 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 02, 2013, 04:45:51 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 09, 2013, 05:42:53 pm
But wait a minute, why would they need to do that in the first place? Rose could have just stayed on the boat and Jack would have been able to survive long enough on the raft for the boats to return. Her idiotic lovey doviness killed Jack.
I now enjoy this film.
Post by: Neonivek on August 09, 2013, 05:45:39 pm
People have discovered ways for the Titanic to survive post-iceberg as well, but that would have required an unnatural amount of foresight and thinking.
When rose left the lifeboat she did not know about the raft.
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 09, 2013, 05:58:16 pm
As with everything that would require psychic powers.How?
When rose left the lifeboat she did not know about the raft.And this part is irrelevant. She would have known Jack would be willing to die just to protect her [sure enough, he puts himself in mortal danger for her at least 3 times before this and encourages her to stay on the lifeboat], and then leaves safety to put herself at danger once more. All it'd have to have taken is for her to stay on the lifeboat for Jack to be able to focus on keeping himself alive rather than having to keep her alive. All of this is known when she makes the leap. You don't have to have prescient knowledge of wreckage placement to know someone is going to have better chances of living when they are preserving their own chances themselves.
Post by: kaenneth on August 09, 2013, 06:01:19 pm
That's more or less what I thought, and it's what I would try if I somehow couldn't reach the library.
But bunkering up in the library gives me the resources to learn anything vital I might need to know that I don't know. Like if odd looking puffer fish #4 I caught is poisonous, how to maintain a solar panel or make pipe rifles and stuff of that nature.
It's like the internet, only heavier and with fewer cat videos and porn.
Plus, you'll have lots of fire fuel for the winter.
Dean Koontz alone could keep you warm for months.
Post by: Bohandas on October 26, 2014, 10:20:09 pm
The park would have been every bit as dangerous if a mundane bunch of pissed off tigers and bears had gotten loose instead pf a bunch of dinosaurs.
Post by: Xantalos on October 26, 2014, 10:45:02 pm
Post by: 4maskwolf on October 26, 2014, 10:47:01 pm
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2014, 10:52:26 pm
Post by: Bohandas on October 27, 2014, 12:26:45 am
What would the theme park be marketed as then? Ordinary Animal Island Park?
As a zoo. Ultimately that's what it is anyway.
At its core, the story is little different from that incident in San Francisco back in '07 where those zoo tigers got loose from their poorly designed enclosure and clawed those three guys' faces off.
Post by: Sergius on October 27, 2014, 01:03:52 am
The dinosaurs and genetic engineering in Jurassic Park are not at all essential to the plot.
The park would have been every bit as dangerous if a mundane bunch of pissed off tigers and bears had gotten loose instead pf a bunch of dinosaurs.
Hell no. Regular animals wouldn't have been able to hack the park's security system like those genius velociraptors.
Post by: itisnotlogical on October 27, 2014, 01:17:49 am
"There are rogue Jedi, who tend to cause a lot of problems. Therefore, there should be a contingency plan to eliminate every last Jedi in the galaxy. Also, it only takes one person to give this order, because why would something like this need any safeguards at all?"
It only gets more bullshit the further you reach into the Expanded Universe material. Seriously, fuck the prequels. >:(
Also, any time anybody holds on to their wrist when using a handgun, because it looks fucking stupid and it makes no sense. It doesn't even work, because holding your wrist in that fashion does nothing to restrict the joint's motion, and probably fucks up your wrist more because the stronger joint in your elbow is taking less of the impact. Any time I see that, it will instantly take me out of the experience. It's a nitpick for me alone, but a nitpick all the same.
Post by: Parsely on October 27, 2014, 01:35:27 am
No, being killed is the only thing that desynchronizes you, forcing you to redo from a checkpoint, because obviously they didn't die before they died. :P Being injured is acceptable because..they were actually injured sometimes! At one point they acknowledge that you're not doing everything exactly how they did it (otherwise you wouldn't have any freedom), just the important strings of connected events in order to learn the thing you need to learn. Who knows what determines where you have start in the first place. Imagine playing AC from when they were a babby and having to watch every moment of their waking lives.Honestly that aspect of Assassins Creed was so stupid that I just imagined that the machine was actually a time reader that needed a DNA match to work.
I was willing to go with it to a point, but the whole "synchronization" stuff really made me wonder. Since taking damage of any kind reduces synchronization, that would imply Altair/Ezio were never, ever injured.
In the sequels, for "full" synchronization (to increase your max HP) on some side and main quests, winning the mission uninjured is sometimes a constraint.
Or Avatar: You have access to fuckin spaceship. Why don't you nuke the native from orbit rather than going into a fuckin stupid deathtrap?At first they were trying to negotiate, specifically so they could avoid doing that. It was only later that they decided they had no choice but to wipe them out, and at that point they already had a bunch of resources deployed on the surface. Also, it seemed that they had other interests regarding the planet aside from the deposits of unobtanium.
Post by: Xantalos on October 27, 2014, 01:37:56 am
Post by: Parsely on October 27, 2014, 02:04:28 am
Man, I couldn't even imagine the public backlash from bombing the Stone Age Space Native Americans. The shitstorm would engulf the galactic arm.Didn't they slaughter them anyways though? I don't think public opinion was a factor in their decisions, just "what's the easiest most time efficient way to obtain the unobtanium." They're not on Earth and it's to my understanding that the expedition was basically all military except for the scientists, so I'm pretty sure they had complete control of the flow of information that was being sent back home.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on October 27, 2014, 02:13:24 am
As for nuking from orbit, with what should they have done that. They don't really have the time to wait for 6 years to get a bomb.
Post by: Parsely on October 27, 2014, 02:30:45 am
-the entire avatar project, which cost millions per cloned avatar, was continued solely as a PR exercice.Didn't the Colonel guy allow it because it let him gain intel on the Avatars' giant tree home?
Post by: 10ebbor10 on October 27, 2014, 02:36:42 am
Colonel didn't foot the bill. He took an opportunity, but there are easier ways to find out how to kill a tree.-the entire avatar project, which cost millions per cloned avatar, was continued solely as a PR exercice.Didn't the Colonel guy allow it because it let him gain intel on the Avatars' giant tree home?
Post by: Parsely on October 27, 2014, 02:51:13 am
Post by: Sergius on October 27, 2014, 09:28:03 am
Post by: Parsely on October 27, 2014, 10:32:09 am
Post by: NobodyPro on October 27, 2014, 10:54:06 am
Revenge of the Sith is a terrible movie in general, but the cherry on top for me is the existence of Order 66. The clones may be bred soldiers, but they're not dumb; at least some of the commanders should have thought "Hey, this is a very strange command, maybe something's not right here" when they were told about it. And the order (according to Wookieepedia) was written by a Jedi. So, a Jedi came up with this idea:Based on that, I'd guess that the logic behind such an order would be "We need some way of subtly telling the clones to kill their attached Jedi in the event that that Jedi is actually a Sith." It didn't seem like Order 66 was supposed to be put in to effect on such a scale.
"There are rogue Jedi, who tend to cause a lot of problems. Therefore, there should be a contingency plan to eliminate every last Jedi in the galaxy. Also, it only takes one person to give this order, because why would something like this need any safeguards at all?"
It only gets more bullshit the further you reach into the Expanded Universe material. Seriously, fuck the prequels. >:(
Post by: Parsely on October 27, 2014, 10:58:50 am
Post by: Sergius on October 27, 2014, 11:01:31 am
More like "big business is pure evil."
Eh, no that's the message that was intended. The message that was conveyed is that the only reason to respect nature and native cultures is if they have actual cool magic (if this had been a jungle planet full of useless Ewoks nobody would have batted an eye ;)).
Post by: Sergius on October 27, 2014, 11:03:25 am
Did all the clones actually obey the order?
"Expanded Universe" says that Yoda's squad from that animated series (Clone Wars? the 3D one I think) disobeyed, then rebelled then got killed or something, because they're special snowflakes. Save for that handful, it was obeyed perfectly by everyone else.
Post by: Mictlantecuhtli on October 27, 2014, 11:25:36 am
Did all the clones actually obey the order?
"Expanded Universe" says that Yoda's squad from that animated series (Clone Wars? the 3D one I think) disobeyed, then rebelled then got killed or something, because they're special snowflakes. Save for that handful, it was obeyed perfectly by everyone else.
I wouldn't be surprised that Yoda would be able to directly impede the orders given, since it's just a simple subspace signal [I believe?].. You'd just need a simple interruption of the moment the order is given, unless it's a continuous process. We aren't really given any explanation into the clone psyches, though.
Easy enough for
I mean, he is Yoda. He's pretty much the only kind of Jedi outside of the old Sith that I can give leeway with silly shit because he's so mysteriously unexpanded on in his powers.
Post by: Sergius on October 27, 2014, 11:32:02 am
Did all the clones actually obey the order?
"Expanded Universe" says that Yoda's squad from that animated series (Clone Wars? the 3D one I think) disobeyed, then rebelled then got killed or something, because they're special snowflakes. Save for that handful, it was obeyed perfectly by everyone else.
I wouldn't be surprised that Yoda would be able to directly impede the orders given, since it's just a simple subspace signal [I believe?].. You'd just need a simple interruption of the moment the order is given, unless it's a continuous process. We aren't really given any explanation into the clone psyches, though.
I mean, he is Yoda. He's pretty much the only kind of Jedi outside of the old Sith that I can give leeway with silly shit because he's so mysteriously unexpanded on in his powers.
There was no interrupting of orders or Force usage, it was all regular rapport and loyalty with the clones and fortune cookie wisdom from Yoda and all that jazz, also because they had more individuality for some reason. They were all "band of brothers" and stuff. Also if you watch the movie they weren't *with* Yoda the precise moment the order was given, he was in Kashyyk and killed the generic clones he was with at the time, before getting stuffed into an escape pod by the 'Baccas.
I don't remember off the top of my head but there's something in the SW wiki that describes the event with more detail.
The show was essentially Band of Brothers IN SPACE!, and the order 66 rebelling was from some novel I think.
Post by: Mictlantecuhtli on October 27, 2014, 11:33:11 am
Post by: Sergius on October 27, 2014, 11:35:01 am
Perhaps he just had his own batch without the kill order receptor? If that was even allowed.. I mean, maybe Yoda was allowed his own personal honor guard of sorts.
Nah, they weren't Yoda's personal guard or anything, they just follow Yoda in a couple episodes, and do a bunch of other stuff with other generals in most of the rest. Remember in the movie, Yoda *was* attacked by clones when the order was given.
EDIT: Hm, I may be getting the clones wrong, Wookiepedia says there were 3 or 4 squads that explicitly disobeyed the order (just faked it and were all "must kill Jediiiii" but didn't actually do it, even helping some escape). I think one was the squad from that Republic Commando game, another was from some novel, and another was from the first batch of clones which didn't have all the free will properly pound out of them. The Order isn't so much a Mental compulsion as it is just a legal order that they're trained to obey, being the good and loyal soldiers that they've been bred to be. So while it's possible to disobey, apparently only like 1% would even consider to do so.
(I would think also that something like 98% of the Clones weren't even near any Jedi at the time, there being only a few thousand Jedis and millions of troopers), so it was all like "hey clone dudes, if you see any Jedi, make sure you kill em, ok?" and they were all like "ok, sure, whatever dude" and then spent the rest of their lives never meeting a Jedi.
Post by: Mictlantecuhtli on October 27, 2014, 11:39:33 am
One thing that I don't get is how Yoda wouldn't even be partially aware of the kill order implanted into the brain of billions of soldiers he works with directed at him and all the people he's ever loved and worked with. He can detect dormant thoughts and lost things, you're saying a master of divination wouldn't be able to find extremely malicious orders planted into the brains of his soldiers? It's just all fdkhgdshgfdasjhgfjdsgfdjf the clone wars are stupid. The Jedi shouldn't even be relying on Clones as fodder, even if they're 'just clones'. I don't remember much cannon fodder in the old jedi movements, because they didn't take too kindly to sacrificing people for their cause.. I dunno, the Jedi council at the end of the republic era was a weak and twisted thing. There's a reason it was so easy to just snuff them out, they got complacent and thought they were the true power of the universe.. If anything the 'Jedi' side during the republic era became so gray that it's hard to say whether they're actually the good guys anymore. Especially when you take into account the Jedi using normal people as cannon fodder from this point onward because they let their own numbers dwindle so much during the peace they thought they had..
This is especially why I enjoy the 2nd episode of the newfangled movies. It gives some sort of an insight into how the republic was. It wasn't a noble enterprise by any means, and the Jedi were basically the whips for an anarcho capitalist system that kept people around the universe in castes.
Post by: Glloyd on October 27, 2014, 02:17:15 pm
But then again, my biggest issue with mostly all superheros is that everyone else except our adimantium-spandex clad hero is totally useless. Always bothered me.
Post by: rabidgam3r on October 27, 2014, 03:31:00 pm
Post by: Glloyd on October 27, 2014, 03:36:59 pm
Just be glad Voldemort didn't buy a nuke with alchemized gold to blast Hogwarts off the face of the planet.
That was along that line of though. Like, it takes place in late 90's, early 2000's. I'm sure some halfblood would've seen tanks/military combat on the TV growing up. What's preventing them from just Wingardium Leviosaing some armored vehicles out of there, and just performing a coordinated strike on Hogwarts? I'm sure the magical stone is thick and all, but I don't think it would stand up to high explosives. Any type of firearms would give any wizard an extreme advantage. Sure, Avada Kadavra is effective and all, but it's hard to summon the mental fortitude to cast a spell when your femur has been shattered in 3 places from a short burst from a hundred metres away.
Just sayin'
Post by: rabidgam3r on October 27, 2014, 05:21:30 pm
although i would love to see some muggleborn ask dumbledore for the wifi password
Post by: DJ on October 27, 2014, 05:25:07 pm
Post by: Parsely on October 27, 2014, 05:27:52 pm
Post by: Neonivek on October 27, 2014, 05:52:48 pm
I remember it being a pretty big thing that "technology" couldn't work in Hogwarts. A huge generalization, probably just meaning electronics.
although i would love to see some muggleborn ask dumbledore for the wifi password
It was honestly one of the WORST lines... because "Technology" is such a vague term.
I hate when I hear the barbarian character say "Ugh! I hate technology" and smashes it with an axe... I just want to go "HEY moron! That Axe is technology that was MADE by technology"
Post by: itisnotlogical on October 27, 2014, 06:01:15 pm
Post by: Bohandas on October 27, 2014, 06:08:00 pm
About Harry Potter, I'd say that wizards and witches simply didn't think to use muggle weapons because they're generally very old-fashioned. In HP magicians basically live in a world apart from the muggles, with places like Diagon Alley, Platform 9 & 3/4 and Hogwarts hidden by all sorts of pocket dimensions and glamours. They even wear cloaks and robes in broad daylight. All of the adult characters are much, much older than Harry, and acceptance of half-bloods and muggle-borns seemed to be a very recent development (enough that Draco inherited some of Lucius' racism). So it's likely that none of them realized how effective muggle weaponry could be, especially not old farts like Dumbledore and Voldemort who lived almost completely in the wizarding world.
Plus, even if he did realize how effective muggle weaponry could be he probably wouldn't use it anyway due to him being racist against them
Post by: Glloyd on October 27, 2014, 06:11:12 pm
EDIT: also, I think I've learned not to joke about fandom-related lore on Bay 12, everyone takes me way too seriously.
Either way, I did always wonder as a kid why wizards didn't use guns :P
Post by: Fniff on October 27, 2014, 06:22:40 pm
Hence why I like Skullduggery Pleasant.
Post by: Culise on October 27, 2014, 07:37:00 pm
Oh, and because of *how* Voldemort's continued survival was assured, specifically since Harry Potter himself is actually a horcrux/phylactery/soul-hidey-thingy, it wouldn't actually take...but no one outside of Dumbledore, Slughorn, and the Death Eaters would know that yet. Heck, the witch hunts that could result would be an ideal climate for Voldy's Death Eaters. It could be the core of a fascinating story, albeit one very different.
Post by: Fniff on October 27, 2014, 07:40:42 pm
Post by: Sergius on October 28, 2014, 09:33:02 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sergius on October 28, 2014, 09:42:53 am
From what I've seen from the movies, the wizards in those movies/books are extremely ignorant of anything that's not wizardly-world related. Seriously, after a life education of faux latin words and pointing sticks and mixing hippopotagriff nutsack-juice potions, it's hard to believe that any of them can handle even basic math or know the difference between a mammal and a fern.
Sure, you occasionally get the "eccentric" wizard that knows what "petroleum" means, or maybe that the moon isn't made of magic cheese. And we're told they have "mug studies" or whatever, but as an elective because most wizards don't need to know that they shouldn't stick their fingers into an electric outlet. So other than the "super wise wizzards" like Dumbledore I don't expect wizards to know how the world works beyond a middle-ages era. Even when they're attacking mortals and being all superior they're more likely to just blow cars up without even knowing what they are.
It's fine if you're going to spend your entire life holed up in Hogwarts or similar places, but otherwise they just seem to willingly limit themselves.
Post by: Il Palazzo on October 28, 2014, 10:32:07 am
There's this movie, Chronicle, that's about 3 boy that get superpowers from a meteor. It's filmed in "found footage" style, sorta. Gonna spoilerify the rest.It was easier to suspend disbelief pre-Ferguson, I guess.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tiruin on October 28, 2014, 10:57:30 am
There's this movie, Chronicle, that's about 3 boy that get superpowers from a meteor. It's filmed in "found footage" style, sorta. Gonna spoilerify the rest.Huh O_o I remember this one.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Though I vaguely remember how the cops acted in the last scene--there were bullet fire, I remember, and what I recall is the 'bad' guy repelled them or halted their weaponry/bullets.
Post by: Jopax on October 28, 2014, 11:09:03 am
Spoiler: Chronicle (click to show/hide)
Post by: Bohandas on October 28, 2014, 11:13:10 am
Yeah, they wanted to capture a brain bug, but if they nuked the planet from orbit they wouldn't need to, except perhaps simply as a scientific curiousity.
Post by: DJ on October 28, 2014, 11:16:58 am
It's funny how guns are basically the muggles version of a fireball spell, but worse. Much much worse.Do they have full auto 50 cal belt fed fireball wands?
Post by: Greiger on October 28, 2014, 11:39:40 am
I kinda figured guns were more like magic missile. So much so that in a magitek fantasy setting I threw together once there was a weapons manufacturer that produced semi-auto rifles that were enchanted in such a way that they would fire a single magic missile(caster level 1) for each pull of the trigger.
The aiming was treated like a ranged touch though (gun had to be pointed at a valid magic missile target to actually fire or it would jam) so it kinda lost the always hit the target fun of an actual mage casting magic missile.
Just teach the hogwarts mages like that. You pull this switch here and whatever you point it at gets magi missiled. Who needs explaining how it works, say it's magic and I'm sure they'd pick it right up.
Post by: Sergius on October 28, 2014, 02:21:12 pm
There's this movie, Chronicle, that's about 3 boy that get superpowers from a meteor. It's filmed in "found footage" style, sorta. Gonna spoilerify the rest.Huh O_o I remember this one.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Though I vaguely remember how the cops acted in the last scene--there were bullet fire, I remember, and what I recall is the 'bad' guy repelled them or halted their weaponry/bullets.
You can see the whole scene here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m7z7HGZY9M
There's a grand total of one bullet fired from a regular police handgun, which good guy catches (catching it actually injures his hand so).
This is because the good guy said he surrendered and had his hands in the air and asked them not to shoot, which apparently cops find very suspicious and demands swift and lethal action.
Then later they fly to a plaza where bad guy has 500 laser sights pointed at him by SWAT, who are known for their measured and cool headed response and completely incapable of escalating any situation. They order him to stand down, which he interprets as asking him to flail his arms menacingly and scream at them for a good 30 seconds, stumbling all over the place (maybe he thinks the lasers are a spotlight and he's supposed to do some interpretative dance for them?). So they shout at him some more to stand down (I'm sure at this point a few of them are thinking "maybe if we say please?")
Then he shoves a couple of cars and SWAT cops (one cop even manages to keep his rifle aimed at him the entire time he's flying backwards). Then a police helicopter shines a light at him for another minute without actually trying to stop him or anything, while he keeps screaming and attacking camera lenses, apparently.
Post by: Neonivek on October 28, 2014, 02:49:31 pm
Honestly there is a lot in the movie that bugs me, but they are things I could live with...
But that song... HOLY COW that song!
Not only is it a dumb forced romance song in a movie about NATURALLY PROGRESSING RELATIONSHIPS! But HOLY goodness... a song about looking past someone's terrible qualities by focusing on their terrible qualities and saying they are a fixer upper... and then that stupid throw away line about "how you can't really change people" DEAR GOODNESS MOVIE! I've never heard a more trite "no our song isn't bad... see we had a line saying how our lyrics mean something else completely RIGHT NEAR THE END!".
AHHHH!
Post by: ChairmanPoo on October 28, 2014, 02:56:59 pm
Just be glad Voldemort didn't buy a nuke with alchemized gold to blast Hogwarts off the face of the planet.
Relevant: http://twistedspeedo.com/?p=753
Post by: Sergius on October 28, 2014, 03:41:22 pm
Gonna add the song "A little bit of a Fixer Upper" from Frozen
Honestly there is a lot in the movie that bugs me, but they are things I could live with...
But that song... HOLY COW that song!
Not only is it a dumb forced romance song in a movie about NATURALLY PROGRESSING RELATIONSHIPS! But HOLY goodness... a song about looking past someone's terrible qualities by focusing on their terrible qualities and saying they are a fixer upper... and then that stupid throw away line about "how you can't really change people" DEAR GOODNESS MOVIE! I've never heard a more trite "no our song isn't bad... see we had a line saying how our lyrics mean something else completely RIGHT NEAR THE END!".
AHHHH!
I think Frozen is one of those movies you're supposed to like because Academy Awards and stuff. But to tell the truth I found it quite underwhelming and some of the singing was just terribad, and I don't really care for the characters, and I'm still annoyed that they were all so eager to cash in with Once Upon a Time (which is itself a huge Disney cash-in but at least it was somewhat quirky, the Frozen crossover is just completely in-your-face).
Post by: i2amroy on October 28, 2014, 03:52:18 pm
In Starship Troopers it always bugged me that they didn't simply nuke the planet from orbit.A lot of films with proficient space travel seem to gloss over the fact that an efficient and powerful space engine is exactly the same technology needed to pull off a planet-wide kinetic Exterminatus. Assuming you don't want to retrieve something from the biosphere of a planet all you have to do to wipe out a planet is find a sufficiently large asteroid a sufficiently far distance away, accelerate it to near light speed, and then go dark. The end result is a chunk of rock that is nigh-undetectable and by the time it is close enough to be detectable it doesn't make any difference because all blowing it up would do is increase the level of destruction.
Yeah, they wanted to capture a brain bug, but if they nuked the planet from orbit they wouldn't need to, except perhaps simply as a scientific curiosity.
Of course when the alternative is for the story line to be that all the governments suddenly panic, make an announcement about how we are all going to be dead in an hour, and then have 99% of all life be exterminated instantly, followed by the aliens landing on the desolate planet and beginning mining operations, it's pretty easy to see why they ignore that fact. :P
I think Frozen is one of those movies you're supposed to like because Academy Awards and stuff. But to tell the truth I found it quite underwhelming and some of the singing was just terribad, and I don't really care for the characters, and I'm still annoyed that they were all so eager to cash in with Once Upon a Time (which is itself a huge Disney cash-in but at least it was somewhat quirky, the Frozen crossover is just completely in-your-face).I liked it because it was the first time an animated Disney film really pushed some of the standard "fairy tale" boundaries that they usually follow. It simultaneously managed to hit the both the
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on October 28, 2014, 03:59:45 pm
Post by: Culise on October 28, 2014, 04:17:00 pm
I honestly think this is large part of the charm of Frozen. The tunes are catchy for the young'ns, the aesthetics appealing, and the story takes some interesting twists that aren't usually expected to come out of Disney's main animation studios, much less their flagship fairy tale lines. Some of the things on deeper thought, though...I think Frozen is one of those movies you're supposed to like because Academy Awards and stuff. But to tell the truth I found it quite underwhelming and some of the singing was just terribad, and I don't really care for the characters, and I'm still annoyed that they were all so eager to cash in with Once Upon a Time (which is itself a huge Disney cash-in but at least it was somewhat quirky, the Frozen crossover is just completely in-your-face).I liked it because it was the first time an animated Disney film really pushed some of the standard "fairy tale" boundaries that they usually follow. It simultaneously managed to hit the both themarks, as well as managing to hit the rare "two strong female leads" mark as well.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Scar
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Parsely on October 28, 2014, 04:17:35 pm
In Starship Troopers it always bugged me that they didn't simply nuke the planet from orbit.Though not for lack of trying on other planets, the bugs take shelter underground whenever they try bombing them. >_> It's the whole reason why they need the mobile infantry, because you can't take them on like a traditional enemy.
Yeah, they wanted to capture a brain bug, but if they nuked the planet from orbit they wouldn't need to, except perhaps simply as a scientific curiousity.
Post by: DJ on October 28, 2014, 04:29:42 pm
Post by: Jopax on October 28, 2014, 04:39:27 pm
Just bury the fucks and wait for them to starve or something.
Post by: Parsely on October 28, 2014, 06:20:51 pm
How useful is it to hide underground if your whole atmosphere burned away?That's not how it works.
Not even that is neccessary. Thermobaric weapons, bunker busters, earthquake bombs.Yes, bury the subterranean creatures, why didn't we think of that?
Just bury the fucks and wait for them to starve or something.
The infantry even carried tactical nukes to seal holes, and that obviously only served as a delaying tactic. There's nothing stopping them from digging more holes.
Post by: NobodyPro on October 28, 2014, 07:05:55 pm
A lot of films with proficient space travel seem to gloss over the fact that an efficient and powerful space engine is exactly the same technology needed to pull off a planet-wide kinetic Exterminatus. Assuming you don't want to retrieve something from the biosphere of a planet all you have to do to wipe out a planet is find a sufficiently large asteroid a sufficiently far distance away, accelerate it to near light speed, and then go dark. The end result is a chunk of rock that is nigh-undetectable and by the time it is close enough to be detectable it doesn't make any difference because all blowing it up would do is increase the level of destruction.Rocks are NOT free, citizen. (http://img.4plebs.org/boards/tg/image/1365/12/1365124312316.jpg)
Of course when the alternative is for the story line to be that all the governments suddenly panic, make an announcement about how we are all going to be dead in an hour, and then have 99% of all life be exterminated instantly, followed by the aliens landing on the desolate planet and beginning mining operations, it's pretty easy to see why they ignore that fact. :P
Post by: Bohandas on October 28, 2014, 07:07:59 pm
The infantry even carried tactical nukes to seal holes, and that obviously only served as a delaying tactic. There's nothing stopping them from digging more holes.
There's a huge difference between a tactical nuke and a full sized hydrogen bomb. A small tactical nuke like the kind that they were carrying is roughly equivalent to a conventional blockbuster (the MK-54 Davy Crockett Tactical Nuke has a yield of 10 tons of TNT, approximately equivalent to the yields of conventional blockbuster bombs such as the 7 ton Grand Slam Bomb and the 11 ton GBU-43/B MOAB), just in a smaller and easier to carry form. A russian Tsar Bomba (yield equivalent to 50-100 MEGAtons of TNT depending on the specific design used [by contrast, the the combined total yield of all bombs used in World War 2 - including the Fat Man and the Little Boy - put together is estimated to be just over three megatons]) could easily take out most of Rhode Island
Post by: Neonivek on October 28, 2014, 07:43:22 pm
ScarSpoiler (click to show/hide)
Yeah but to admit Frozen tried WAAAAAAAAY too hard to the extent where they really might as well not have bothered.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sergius on October 28, 2014, 08:28:31 pm
Post by: Neonivek on October 28, 2014, 08:39:59 pm
Even I knew he was evil and was hoping he wasn't... and at a certain point I was relieved and went "wow, they really didn't make him evil..." mostly because at that point it made no sense for him to be evil anymore.
Turns out he was just incredibly stupid. The second he reveals he is evil he just stops the act altogether... making his earlier act pretty pointless.
As I said before all Frozen had to do is have Hans NOT be evil... and the movie would be 25% better.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: kaenneth on October 28, 2014, 08:53:37 pm
There's this movie, Chronicle, that's about 3 boy that get superpowers from a meteor. It's filmed in "found footage" style, sorta. Gonna spoilerify the rest.Huh O_o I remember this one.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Though I vaguely remember how the cops acted in the last scene--there were bullet fire, I remember, and what I recall is the 'bad' guy repelled them or halted their weaponry/bullets.
You can see the whole scene here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m7z7HGZY9M
There's a grand total of one bullet fired from a regular police handgun, which good guy catches (catching it actually injures his hand so).
This is because the good guy said he surrendered and had his hands in the air and asked them not to shoot, which apparently cops find very suspicious and demands swift and lethal action.
Then later they fly to a plaza where bad guy has 500 laser sights pointed at him by SWAT, who are known for their measured and cool headed response and completely incapable of escalating any situation. They order him to stand down, which he interprets as asking him to flail his arms menacingly and scream at them for a good 30 seconds, stumbling all over the place (maybe he thinks the lasers are a spotlight and he's supposed to do some interpretative dance for them?). So they shout at him some more to stand down (I'm sure at this point a few of them are thinking "maybe if we say please?")
Then he shoves a couple of cars and SWAT cops (one cop even manages to keep his rifle aimed at him the entire time he's flying backwards). Then a police helicopter shines a light at him for another minute without actually trying to stop him or anything, while he keeps screaming and attacking camera lenses, apparently.
You know the military would prefer a living sample be captured.
Post by: Sergius on October 28, 2014, 09:11:50 pm
You know the military would prefer a living sample be captured.
It was SWAT. They don't care about no sample.
Post by: Parsely on October 28, 2014, 09:28:33 pm
Obviously, you don't want to blow yourself up as well. But my point about the enemy being located largely underground still stands. You wouldn't be able to destroy underground nests with nukes, the immediate threat of warriors on the surface would be gone, but their ability to breed would remain. And suddenly you've made it impossible to send in the men who can take care of it, that is to say your infantry.The infantry even carried tactical nukes to seal holes, and that obviously only served as a delaying tactic. There's nothing stopping them from digging more holes.There's a huge difference between a tactical nuke and a full sized hydrogen bomb.
Post by: acetech09 on October 28, 2014, 11:40:20 pm
The actor's walking was never in sync with the jaegers.
*shudders*
That, and 8ish chinooks carrying a 7,000 ton payload. You'd need over 100 chinooks if the weight was right.
I know many, MANY allowances have to be made to make the concept to work, and most of them I was fine with and accept as a fact of life... but is a jaeger jetpack really that hard?
Post by: Bohandas on October 29, 2014, 12:01:32 am
Obviously, you don't want to blow yourself up as well. But my point about the enemy being located largely underground still stands. You wouldn't be able to destroy underground nests with nukes, the immediate threat of warriors on the surface would be gone, but their ability to breed would remain. And suddenly you've made it impossible to send in the men who can take care of it, that is to say your infantry.The infantry even carried tactical nukes to seal holes, and that obviously only served as a delaying tactic. There's nothing stopping them from digging more holes.There's a huge difference between a tactical nuke and a full sized hydrogen bomb.
What I'm saying that a Tsar Bomba dropped on the surface would probably do more damage to an underground warren than detonating one of those little mini-nukes right in the middle of it.. It is over a million times more powerful. Unless those tunnels go very deep indeed it would force the roof down (as in actively push it down in many places, not just collapse it) and squish anything in them like a giant boot; except for the tunnels near the surface, they would be vaporized along with anything in them.
Post by: Xantalos on October 29, 2014, 01:14:53 am
Post by: Neonivek on October 29, 2014, 01:25:28 am
Battle Royale 2: the entire movie.
I never quite got this. Moments where people go "the entire thing".
Post by: Xantalos on October 29, 2014, 01:32:01 am
So the entire movie was one giant nitpick.
Post by: Parsely on October 29, 2014, 02:24:07 am
What I'm saying that a Tsar Bomba dropped on the surface would probably do more damage to an underground warren than detonating one of those little mini-nukes right in the middle of it.. It is over a million times more powerful. Unless those tunnels go very deep indeed it would force the roof down (as in actively push it down in many places, not just collapse it) and squish anything in them like a giant boot; except for the tunnels near the surface, they would be vaporized along with anything in them.There's a reason the common infantry are equipped with such powerful weapons, because they're most effective when deployed inside these underground areas. A surface detonated anything has limited effect on stuff below the ground (usually the point of surface detonated weapons since if you're deploying these you generally want to hurt stuff on the surface). Most of the force of the explosion moves upwards and horizontally, because there's a big, relatively flat, hard and massive surface (the earth) there to deflect it. You'll get the big crater but it's not big enough to destroy an enemy that's possible hundreds of meters beneath a planet's surface. Also this is assuming they have enough Tsar Bombas to saturate bomb the entire surface of the planet, probably three separate times if they actually wanted to get deep enough to unbury all of them. :v
Also, I'd like to draw a comparison to Americans trying to bomb their enemies in tunnels during Vietnam and how completely and totally ineffective that always turned out to be. :I
Post by: i2amroy on October 29, 2014, 03:45:55 am
Rocks are NOT free, citizen. (http://img.4plebs.org/boards/tg/image/1365/12/1365124312316.jpg)See I know that was intended for humor, but since this is the nitpicky thread after all... :P
Spoiler: Nitpicky Response (click to show/hide)
Post by: lemon10 on October 29, 2014, 11:40:08 am
That is a fair comparison, because I'm pretty sure vietnam is some pretty big inspiraton for the work.What I'm saying that a Tsar Bomba dropped on the surface would probably do more damage to an underground warren than detonating one of those little mini-nukes right in the middle of it.. It is over a million times more powerful. Unless those tunnels go very deep indeed it would force the roof down (as in actively push it down in many places, not just collapse it) and squish anything in them like a giant boot; except for the tunnels near the surface, they would be vaporized along with anything in them.There's a reason the common infantry are equipped with such powerful weapons, because they're most effective when deployed inside these underground areas. A surface detonated anything has limited effect on stuff below the ground (usually the point of surface detonated weapons since if you're deploying these you generally want to hurt stuff on the surface). Most of the force of the explosion moves upwards and horizontally, because there's a big, relatively flat, hard and massive surface (the earth) there to deflect it. You'll get the big crater but it's not big enough to destroy an enemy that's possible hundreds of meters beneath a planet's surface. Also this is assuming they have enough Tsar Bombas to saturate bomb the entire surface of the planet, probably three separate times if they actually wanted to get deep enough to unbury all of them. :v
Also, I'd like to draw a comparison to Americans trying to bomb their enemies in tunnels during Vietnam and how completely and totally ineffective that always turned out to be. :I
Also of note from the book (not the movie): At the start of the war bombing them wasn't a option, simple nuclear bombs weren't strong enough to wipe out tunnels miles(?) underground, especially considering that as long as the queen survives your bombing is useless and that they are also sentient, so the queens room could probably be specially reinforced. But by the end of the war things are different, they get planet-buster bombs and they simply use them whenever then encounter a bug planet.
Post by: Sebastian2203 on October 29, 2014, 01:35:16 pm
I am heavy nitpicker and I see everything as weird/unrealistic ( mainly about military movies)
Eh lemme show some kind of example.
Hero of the military movie moves around the field being shot on and manages TO NOT get hit while exposing himself for VERY long time. But watch out, bad guy goes out of cover for 1 second and is insta killed.
Then I could go on and on... but my memory is weak but I will sure return to this thread when I sort all my memories and post them here.
Well I wanted to say I understand movies bend a lot of things so they are more interesting and cool, because no one would watch movies if everything was too realistic/simple. BUT that does not stop me from bitching here about it.
Post by: itisnotlogical on October 29, 2014, 01:45:00 pm
Post by: Jopax on October 29, 2014, 02:08:15 pm
Most of the movie qualifies tbh, but two parts stood out quite a bit.
When the female MUTO broke out of the nuclear waste bunker you'd think some sort of security would notice the giant gaping hole in the mountain made by a giant cockroach. Nope, they drive up to said mountain and only by checking every single bunker do they realise one of them is blown open.
You'd think nuclear waste disposal sites would have more security.
Second, they use a train to transport the nuke that's supposed to kill the monsters that feed on radiation (because this one is bigger it'll kill them, honest). Said train is going very near the route of the monster that detects and feeds on radiation, no bad ideas there, except it does find them and wrecks their shit and also eats the nuke they were transporting.
Except it doesn't somehow and the nuke is picked up by a helicopter which then flies it to LA.
Why the fuck didn't they transport it by air from the start? How did the nuke survive being eaten?
Post by: i2amroy on October 29, 2014, 02:42:22 pm
Any sort of science-fiction control panel that is just unlabeled buttons and blinky switches, or something that doesn't even look like an interface. Any time I see it I think "How is anybody supposed to use that?". LCARS from Star Trek is the worst offender; most buttons are completely unlabeled, and people somehow enter complex information without any sort of keyboard/pad or even distinguishable number keys.It's all actually cybernetic eye implants in every crew member. Because the physical buttons aren't labeled it lets any button be relabeled on the fly depending on both the context of the current menu and the authority of the button presser, and it helps keep a valuable military weapon out of enemy hands since they can't control it.
Post by: smjjames on October 29, 2014, 02:52:58 pm
Any sort of science-fiction control panel that is just unlabeled buttons and blinky switches, or something that doesn't even look like an interface. Any time I see it I think "How is anybody supposed to use that?". LCARS from Star Trek is the worst offender; most buttons are completely unlabeled, and people somehow enter complex information without any sort of keyboard/pad or even distinguishable number keys.It's all actually cybernetic eye implants in every crew member. Because the physical buttons aren't labeled it lets any button be relabeled on the fly depending on both the context of the current menu and the authority of the button presser, and it helps keep a valuable military weapon out of enemy hands since they can't control it.
To be fair to the first generation Star Trek, it was a low budget deal because 60s.
For TNG and onwards, no idea, maybe because such a detail would be too small to see on film/tv?
Post by: DJ on October 29, 2014, 03:20:51 pm
Post by: Bohandas on October 29, 2014, 03:46:22 pm
What I'm saying that a Tsar Bomba dropped on the surface would probably do more damage to an underground warren than detonating one of those little mini-nukes right in the middle of it.. It is over a million times more powerful. Unless those tunnels go very deep indeed it would force the roof down (as in actively push it down in many places, not just collapse it) and squish anything in them like a giant boot; except for the tunnels near the surface, they would be vaporized along with anything in them.There's a reason the common infantry are equipped with such powerful weapons, because they're most effective when deployed inside these underground areas. A surface detonated anything has limited effect on stuff below the ground (usually the point of surface detonated weapons since if you're deploying these you generally want to hurt stuff on the surface). Most of the force of the explosion moves upwards and horizontally, because there's a big, relatively flat, hard and massive surface (the earth) there to deflect it. You'll get the big crater but it's not big enough to destroy an enemy that's possible hundreds of meters beneath a planet's surface. Also this is assuming they have enough Tsar Bombas to saturate bomb the entire surface of the planet, probably three separate times if they actually wanted to get deep enough to unbury all of them. :v
Also, I'd like to draw a comparison to Americans trying to bomb their enemies in tunnels during Vietnam and how completely and totally ineffective that always turned out to be. :I
Imagine that you have two little models - each about the size of a pool table - of a portion of the landscape and the tunnels under it. You throw a few bang-snaps at the first one, and detonate an MK-3 concussion grenade in the middle of the second one. Do you think that the damage to the tunnels will be similar in both models?
Post by: Jopax on October 29, 2014, 03:59:54 pm
Also also, even if they are underground bugs and all that, they still need food and air I think, if you keep burying them they really won't have easy access to either so it's only a matter of time.
Post by: Culise on October 29, 2014, 04:19:48 pm
That was a significant contributing factor, which is why LCARS in general is so redonkulously big. Mind you, they did actually have labels, except that since they were too small to see on film/TV; they usually came out as little black blurs. Also, due to the need for reuse of props (especially since this was still before CGI, so they were literally cutting blocks out of black film wrapped over colored film lights), they also weren't very specific - a lot of LCARS displays have number labels instead of actual lettering. In fact, mostly because they couldn't be read on the screen, the art staff was always fond of slipping little in-jokes into the okudagrams; for instance, the hamster that runs the warp engines on the USS Enterprise-D, several incarnations of the Doctor in one big family tree, and references to Gunbuster and Dirty Pair.Any sort of science-fiction control panel that is just unlabeled buttons and blinky switches, or something that doesn't even look like an interface. Any time I see it I think "How is anybody supposed to use that?". LCARS from Star Trek is the worst offender; most buttons are completely unlabeled, and people somehow enter complex information without any sort of keyboard/pad or even distinguishable number keys.It's all actually cybernetic eye implants in every crew member. Because the physical buttons aren't labeled it lets any button be relabeled on the fly depending on both the context of the current menu and the authority of the button presser, and it helps keep a valuable military weapon out of enemy hands since they can't control it.
To be fair to the first generation Star Trek, it was a low budget deal because 60s.
For TNG and onwards, no idea, maybe because such a detail would be too small to see on film/tv?
Post by: Neonivek on October 29, 2014, 04:28:19 pm
I remember watching a episode of Voyager where they were in a holodeck program called Captain Proton which is basically a black and white era sci-fi and they pointed attention to the differences between classic sci-fi and modern one (for example the forcefield is called the lightning shield)
and I said to myself "Wow, I'd actually watch this" and my dad said "Me too"
Post by: itisnotlogical on October 29, 2014, 04:34:59 pm
That was a significant contributing factor, which is why LCARS in general is so redonkulously big. Mind you, they did actually have labels, except that since they were too small to see on film/TV; they usually came out as little black blurs. Also, due to the need for reuse of props (especially since this was still before CGI, so they were literally cutting blocks out of black film wrapped over colored film lights), they also weren't very specific - a lot of LCARS displays have number labels instead of actual lettering. In fact, mostly because they couldn't be read on the screen, the art staff was always fond of slipping little in-jokes into the okudagrams; for instance, the hamster that runs the warp engines on the USS Enterprise-D, several incarnations of the Doctor in one big family tree, and references to Gunbuster and Dirty Pair.Any sort of science-fiction control panel that is just unlabeled buttons and blinky switches, or something that doesn't even look like an interface. Any time I see it I think "How is anybody supposed to use that?". LCARS from Star Trek is the worst offender; most buttons are completely unlabeled, and people somehow enter complex information without any sort of keyboard/pad or even distinguishable number keys.It's all actually cybernetic eye implants in every crew member. Because the physical buttons aren't labeled it lets any button be relabeled on the fly depending on both the context of the current menu and the authority of the button presser, and it helps keep a valuable military weapon out of enemy hands since they can't control it.
To be fair to the first generation Star Trek, it was a low budget deal because 60s.
For TNG and onwards, no idea, maybe because such a detail would be too small to see on film/tv?
Still, there's nothing that even looks like a keyboard. Three rows of tiny square keys with a big one for the spacebar would look like a keyboard, even if you couldn't see the letters. Although I can accept the simplification of things for flow and narrative convenience, I'm still mystified how they type in names or search terms without any visible keypad.
Post by: Bohandas on October 29, 2014, 04:44:31 pm
That was a significant contributing factor, which is why LCARS in general is so redonkulously big. Mind you, they did actually have labels, except that since they were too small to see on film/TV; they usually came out as little black blurs. Also, due to the need for reuse of props (especially since this was still before CGI, so they were literally cutting blocks out of black film wrapped over colored film lights), they also weren't very specific - a lot of LCARS displays have number labels instead of actual lettering. In fact, mostly because they couldn't be read on the screen, the art staff was always fond of slipping little in-jokes into the okudagrams; for instance, the hamster that runs the warp engines on the USS Enterprise-D, several incarnations of the Doctor in one big family tree, and references to Gunbuster and Dirty Pair.Any sort of science-fiction control panel that is just unlabeled buttons and blinky switches, or something that doesn't even look like an interface. Any time I see it I think "How is anybody supposed to use that?". LCARS from Star Trek is the worst offender; most buttons are completely unlabeled, and people somehow enter complex information without any sort of keyboard/pad or even distinguishable number keys.It's all actually cybernetic eye implants in every crew member. Because the physical buttons aren't labeled it lets any button be relabeled on the fly depending on both the context of the current menu and the authority of the button presser, and it helps keep a valuable military weapon out of enemy hands since they can't control it.
To be fair to the first generation Star Trek, it was a low budget deal because 60s.
For TNG and onwards, no idea, maybe because such a detail would be too small to see on film/tv?
Still, there's nothing that even looks like a keyboard. Three rows of tiny square keys with a big one for the spacebar would look like a keyboard, even if you couldn't see the letters. Although I can accept the simplification of things for flow and narrative convenience, I'm still mystified how they type in names or search terms without any visible keypad.
I'm pretty sure that LCARS uses a touchscreen. And voice recognition.
Post by: Parsely on October 29, 2014, 04:51:04 pm
Also also, even if they are underground bugs and all that, they still need food and air I think, if you keep burying them they really won't have easy access to either so it's only a matter of time.They can survive on the surface of asteroids.
Post by: USEC_OFFICER on October 29, 2014, 04:57:54 pm
Post by: Parsely on October 29, 2014, 11:16:56 pm
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-Gi_jwnaMSkY/TYSTMvbiWMI/AAAAAAAAAQQ/L9u4J6ZHxzs/s1600/Plasma.jpg)
Post by: Neonivek on October 29, 2014, 11:37:13 pm
Put up a solar shade then. No matter how hostile an environment these bugs can survive in, I'm pretty sure that they can't violate the law of conservation of energy.
If you were aware of the extended universe...
Yeah they could :P
Post by: chevil on October 30, 2014, 01:26:50 am
But charging Anti-tank artillery with tanks and the whole third act was just stupid.
[sarcasm] Everyone knows that the Nazis heavily used blank cartridges and charges to scare the enemy into surrendering! [/sarcasm]
Post by: Parsely on October 30, 2014, 01:44:51 am
Post by: chevil on October 30, 2014, 01:52:04 am
They didn't have any infantry to do that for them?The infantry was hiding behind the tanks.
Post by: USEC_OFFICER on October 30, 2014, 08:09:49 am
Cue the arachnids destroying the solar shade with plasma. :v
-snip-
Which is why you:
A. smash the surface of the planet to dust with an asteroid or two first.
B. Set up the solar shade in a orbit out of reach of the plasma bugs. Or, you know, just repair the shade after they damage it or set up a new one. The energy output required to destroy the shade is far more than the energy they'll receive in the meantime.
If you were aware of the extended universe...
Yeah they could :P
...
F- this, I'm out of here.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 08, 2014, 07:30:25 pm
Post by: Sergius on December 18, 2014, 12:05:03 am
So, watching Happy Feet on cable (again) reminded me.
Morale of the story:
We must save the penguins, because they can dance good.
Except they can't. So... fuck 'em? :-\
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sinistar on December 18, 2014, 07:23:19 am
I think a fair questions that need to be asked are also:
1) Are bug-infested planets otherwise interesting for colonization?
TBH, this one could be a bit moot as all of the planets in (original) movie are more or less just desert/rocky wasteland BUT they do feature atmosphere that is breathable by humans without problems so one could speculate they do hold some strategic value... maybe? Reducing them to irradiated rocks significantly reduces this value. Which kinda brings us to next question;
2) Are the bugs radiation resistant?
What's that about Earth's roaches and scorpions being able to survive ground zero amount of radiation? I'm not sure what amount of nukes you need to destroy planets surface, I'm guessing we are pretty capable of doing this today, but no amount of nuking will help you if the bugs just duck and cover during initial bombarding and then crawl out, happily unbothered by the now-glowing surroundings. Speaking of burrowing;
3) What do humans even know about the bugs?
As it's been said, you'd probably need bunker busters and the like to destroy their underground cities from the atmosphere. However, I'd argue that the problem is in large in humanity's misinformation regarding bugs. "Random plasma fire" and full-frontal night-time assault on a major bug planet and all that jazz. They don't even know how deep the bug tunnels really go. OR where to even aim with their potential orbital bombardment if they'd wish to bomb the tunnels directly, instead of dropping bunker busters on every m2 of the planet.
Still, I'll admit my point are a bit weak, especially 3rd one. There's no stopping humanity just dropping asteroid on bugs head or otherwise destroying planet as whole, bar the actual possession of such planet-destroying technology (which honestly we know nothing about). And for 2nd - radiation resistance or not, it seems future humans are pretty rad resistant themselves... or their bombs are pretty low-impact in that regard, seeing how willfully they use tac-nukes (and nuking whole planets with small scale nukes, though in this particular case I might just be misunderstanding military jargon for "glazing the planet").
Post by: Sergius on January 10, 2015, 07:51:17 pm
The "Axiom" and everything in it is so futuristic, lots of artificial and anti-gravity and probe robots with ridiculously overpowered cannons that don't even need finger joints, can enter warp or hyperspeed or whatever that was.
Everything in Earth at the time they leave is so low tech it seems barely 21th century, except for WALL-E robots that grab tiny amounts of garbage and compress it into cubes, apparently one every few hours or so, barely faster than a Roomba. Nothing about it is advanced at all (except maybe its AI, and a maybe too-efficient solar charger), it could be built out of components in most hardware stores today.
Sure, some would say that it's been generations since humanity left, but actually the Axiom(s) were built to leave Earth, so they're at least as old as Earth-tech at the time of the big cleaning project. And no human in the ships seems to have done any kind of productive work since they left, so research and development seems VERY iffy, specially on that scale. Specially inventing a hyperdrive mid-travel.
So, you have something that looks out of Star Trek (Axiom, EVE) and something that seems out of... well, here. Don't even see any kind of ruined futuristic cars in the streets or anything. It all just seems incredibly stupid.
Post by: Neonivek on January 10, 2015, 07:57:52 pm
While WALL-E is basically a trash bot made for low grade commercial work that was likely outdated and obsolete even during its time.
How many buses have you ridden on that were several years out of date?
Post by: andrea on January 10, 2015, 10:10:08 pm
While the earth you see is made of ruins, abandoned for centuries and covered by dirt and filth. You can see some nice engineering feat here and there, but that is it. Anything less big than hill sized has been long destroyed, by environment or by wall-e and his other robotic buddies.
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 11, 2015, 01:34:33 am
Don't forget Dune where you back to the start of mankind if you have enough spice.
Ya I know this is from the start but I feel like doing this anyways
Wouldn't collecting enough spice in dune and using it like that just mean your going past the speed of light and god knows people can interpret that anyway they want
Or does spice work differently?
Post by: Neonivek on January 11, 2015, 01:45:04 am
Don't forget Dune where you back to the start of mankind if you have enough spice.
Ya I know this is from the start but I feel like doing this anyways
Wouldn't collecting enough spice in dune and using it like that just mean your going past the speed of light and god knows people can interpret that anyway they want
Or does spice work differently?
Spice is a drug that pilots take because it allows them to make course corrections long before any problem has occurred. Without it faster then light travel becomes pretty much impossible.
I won't lie for the longest time I did think the FTL engines ran on spice.
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 11, 2015, 01:51:12 am
Post by: Parsely on January 11, 2015, 03:21:28 am
That's not true, you're only desynchronized if you die, and of course none of them died before the time when they actually died. :P It's still dumb though, AssCreed would be better games without the badly interwoven sci-fi plot about aliens.Honestly that aspect of Assassins Creed was so stupid that I just imagined that the machine was actually a time reader that needed a DNA match to work.I was willing to go with it to a point, but the whole "synchronization" stuff really made me wonder. Since taking damage of any kind reduces synchronization, that would imply Altair/Ezio were never, ever injured.
Post by: Neonivek on January 11, 2015, 09:27:10 am
That's not true, you're only desynchronized if you die, and of course none of them died before the time when they actually died. :P It's still dumb though, AssCreed would be better games without the badly interwoven sci-fi plot about aliens.Honestly that aspect of Assassins Creed was so stupid that I just imagined that the machine was actually a time reader that needed a DNA match to work.I was willing to go with it to a point, but the whole "synchronization" stuff really made me wonder. Since taking damage of any kind reduces synchronization, that would imply Altair/Ezio were never, ever injured.
The issue is that Ezio wasn't injured at that point so the contradiction as well as the shock from taking damage lowers the synch.
Yes the weird synch rules do allow some incredible flubbing such as the "Hay piles of safety" and "Water kills!" but still.
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 11, 2015, 09:54:59 am
Post by: itisnotlogical on January 11, 2015, 10:04:09 am
Post by: Neonivek on January 11, 2015, 10:06:59 am
Any situation that could be resolved if people just communicated. I can't think of any from the top of my head, but I know there's tons of movies (maybe I'm getting it confused with games) where the plot could be resolved in the first 30 minutes if the hero simply talked to somebody.
Well here is a hint or two
1) The government doesn't actually want the war to end
and
2) We are not the good guys
Post by: itisnotlogical on January 11, 2015, 10:49:15 am
Any situation that could be resolved if people just communicated. I can't think of any from the top of my head, but I know there's tons of movies (maybe I'm getting it confused with games) where the plot could be resolved in the first 30 minutes if the hero simply talked to somebody.
Well here is a hint or two
1) The government doesn't actually want the war to end
and
2) We are not the good guys
I was saying in general, not about Starship Troopers.
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 11, 2015, 11:01:11 am
Oh that movie was terrible, the lighting sucked, why wouldn't they just?, how did?, blah blah blah
I was so into that movie before I listen to everyone's nit picks now I can't watch it anymore .-.
Post by: Neonivek on January 11, 2015, 11:12:25 am
Any situation that could be resolved if people just communicated. I can't think of any from the top of my head, but I know there's tons of movies (maybe I'm getting it confused with games) where the plot could be resolved in the first 30 minutes if the hero simply talked to somebody.
Well here is a hint or two
1) The government doesn't actually want the war to end
and
2) We are not the good guys
I was saying in general, not about Starship Troopers.
Bonus points for the show I just watched yesterday
Because people UP FRONT asked what the heck the villains were talking about... and the villains said a completely different reason for why they were doing anything.
Post by: Tiruin on January 11, 2015, 11:29:38 am
Any situation that could be resolved if people just communicated. I can't think of any from the top of my head, but I know there's tons of movies (maybe I'm getting it confused with games) where the plot could be resolved in the first 30 minutes if the hero simply talked to somebody.This, as a general note. :-\ So MANY scenarios where the protagonist could've just...talked directly, would've fixed many more things than firepower and fists. >_<
(Like in World War Z :v)
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 11, 2015, 11:44:14 am
The movie was not even remotely close to the book
That ruined the movie for me, it litteraly didn't follow a single thing from the book
Post by: Neonivek on January 11, 2015, 11:47:48 am
Just clearifying World war Z the movie not the book right?
The movie was not even remotely close to the book
That ruined the movie for me, it litteraly didn't follow a single thing from the book
To quote something annoying: "Well the movie wasn't for fans of the book"
and believe it or not... that is the Nitpick that officially made me hate Star Trek the first. I actually liked it, but thought it was kind of weak in its teenie bopper dumb aspect... but you know it was going for something different, not necessarily the direction I would have went with it, but still.
But yes a quote from the creator actually managed to be the Nitpick that ruined the movie.. If only because it is a deflection that is completely wrong in every conceivable sense and represents a large dishonesty from the creator. Since he didn't chose Star Trek because he thought he would put his own spin on it, he picked it for brand recognition.
Post by: bahihs on January 11, 2015, 12:13:28 pm
The biggest ones have to do with astronauts being grossly incompetent. Case in point, that episode where the astronauts crash land in the middle of some barren desert.
Sensible CHILDREN would think, well we weren't in space long enough to go that far, but just in case let me wear my spacesuit so I don't die from virtually everything (temperature, lack of oxygen, vacuum of space etc. etc.)
Instead these so called astronauts, immediately conclude that they are on an asteroid far removed from Earth. And despite thinking that, just waltz on out without any protection. This completely ruins the twist of the episode
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also all giant robot movies, because such things simply cannot exist. They would either collapse on their own weight, or if their piloted, the pilot would faint from motion sickness
Post by: penguinofhonor on January 11, 2015, 12:35:06 pm
Post by: Tiruin on January 11, 2015, 01:00:26 pm
Just clearifying World war Z the movie not the book right?Yeah ._. I read the book (ok, the synopsis) and it was..err. Different. Yes, the movie--sorry bout that.
The movie was not even remotely close to the book
That ruined the movie for me, it litteraly didn't follow a single thing from the book
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 11, 2015, 01:10:37 pm
It's okJust clearifying World war Z the movie not the book right?Yeah ._. I read the book (ok, the synopsis) and it was..err. Different. Yes, the movie--sorry bout that.
The movie was not even remotely close to the book
That ruined the movie for me, it litteraly didn't follow a single thing from the book
You should totaly read the book though
It was spectacular
For those interested, it's basicaly a journalist that goes around after the zombie apocalypse and humanity regains it's footing and he talks to the more notable survivors or the ones with good stories to tell. One of my favorite chapters in the book was him talking to an astronout who was trapped in the ISS for a few years because ya know the world was going to hell, some how people managed to send up a craft to get them out of there though so ya
Post by: Owlbread on January 11, 2015, 01:18:50 pm
Spoiler: It really annoyed me. (click to show/hide)
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 11, 2015, 01:35:31 pm
Al Pacino's makeup in The Godfather: Part 3. Very distracting and it made other flaws far more noticeable.Spoiler: It really annoyed me. (click to show/hide)
I have some trouble seeing the problem. I guess I can see there's something off, but I cannot say what that would be. Care to elaborate?
Post by: Owlbread on January 11, 2015, 01:51:11 pm
I have some trouble seeing the problem. I guess I can see there's something off, but I cannot say what that would be. Care to elaborate?
It's hard to explain because all the pictures of it look quite decent, but when you actually watch the movie (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UneS2Uwc6xw) though it doesn't quite work and it looks really fake. I'm just struggling to locate a good example.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 11, 2015, 01:57:48 pm
It's okJust clearifying World war Z the movie not the book right?Yeah ._. I read the book (ok, the synopsis) and it was..err. Different. Yes, the movie--sorry bout that.
The movie was not even remotely close to the book
That ruined the movie for me, it litteraly didn't follow a single thing from the book
You should totaly read the book though
It was spectacular
For those interested, it's basicaly a journalist that goes around after the zombie apocalypse and humanity regains it's footing and he talks to the more notable survivors or the ones with good stories to tell. One of my favorite chapters in the book was him talking to an astronout who was trapped in the ISS for a few years because ya know the world was going to hell, some how people managed to send up a craft to get them out of there though so ya
That is, I'm afraid, impossible.
The ISS always has two escape pods (ie, a soyuz) docked. Thus, astronauts can always return to Earth if needed.
Pretty sure they also don't have a few years of life support.
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 11, 2015, 01:59:10 pm
I never said it was possible I just said it was fun to read, don't you dare nit pick that book till I can't read it any more
Post by: Fniff on January 11, 2015, 02:02:43 pm
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 11, 2015, 02:04:53 pm
Really, my main problem with that book is
.-. That's not all that bothering...
Almost any zombie movie/book portays national militaries as sucking hardcore
Post by: Sheb on January 11, 2015, 02:11:41 pm
And as for the US army... Well, the zeds are awfulyy hard to kill. They DID manage to stop the zeds at the rockies though.
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 11, 2015, 02:14:03 pm
Post by: Neonivek on January 11, 2015, 02:19:02 pm
I want a sequel to that book for if they take back Asia because China realy f'd up by throwing millions of untrained idiots against the horde just making it so much larger
Wouldn't an untrained idiot STILL take out more zombies? Like, at least two...
Though almost all zombie apocalypses usually have to make their zombies magical to work.
The only one that didn't was 48 (or 42, or 28 days... whatever number it was) where the zombies did eventually die off of natural causes...
Bonus points for Resident Evil, the games, where once again the undead actually will eventually die off all on their own or become inert.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 11, 2015, 02:28:08 pm
IIRC, the ISS crew could go down, but decided to stay up to maintain some of the more important satellites, and there was no one to get them after splashdown anyway. They scavenged supply from a chinese space station too.The Soyuz lands on land (And the survival kit has a pistol, so). There have been no spacecraft doing splashdowns after the Apollo project IIRC.
And as for the US army... Well, the zeds are awfulyy hard to kill. They DID manage to stop the zeds at the rockies though.
And the ISS isn't exactly well placed to repair satellites (completely wrong orbit). Speaking about the wrong orbit, the ISS might not even last the entire time. Depends on when the novel is set, of course. Orbital decay is heavily dependent on the solar cycle.
Post by: miauw62 on January 11, 2015, 02:31:27 pm
The plot is sort of shitty but holy shit that movie was tense and exciting.
Post by: Neonivek on January 11, 2015, 03:12:41 pm
People who enable their brains while watching Pacific Rim are pretty dumb imo :P
The plot is sort of shitty but holy shit that movie was tense and exciting.
To me it doesn't matter how dumb or silly a plot is so long as it is internally consistent.
It is why weird things almost never bug me no matter how odd it gets. Yet anything that refers to a process in real life, but gets it entirely wrong suddenly offputs me.
It is why the part of Jem that actually bugs me isn't the scene where Jem, in a children's cartoon, is in the middle of a room when jagged pieces of glass are flung at her at high speeds ready to kill her... but rather the fact that she is perpetually poor... in spite selling hundreds of millions of albums and singles in a single year and selling out concerts.
In fact the show goes to such lengths to make Jem successful it is ridiculous! Like when she sold a million copies of an album in a single chain... in what amounts to 3 weeks... and this album? Created in a single week, complete with clothes, and a matching car.
Seriously how is someone who can pull of a double platinum hit with a weeks worth of work have any financial problems? Sure she does a LOT of benefit concerts and charity work but they never take that much time or are that lucrative. I even had to calculate
The most expensive charities she runs is
A) A Orphanage, which is about $200,000 dollars a year to run at best.
B) A Radio show... which would cost about $12,000 a year.
Even in the 80s, and I am using modern numbers for that. And she has several gold albums and like 2 platinums.
Post by: bahihs on January 11, 2015, 06:02:14 pm
Also all giant robot movies, because such things simply cannot exist. They would either collapse on their own weight, or if their piloted, the pilot would faint from motion sickness
Anything with dragons annoys me. A lizard with wings that can breathe fire? Who would fall for that?
I'm assuming you're being sarcastic here, but there is a difference between my statement and yours. Giant robots are presumably man-made, usually in a sci-fi context, thus they should to some extent obey the laws of physics. The types of robots I'm talking about are the humanoid looking ones, which really would not be possible (or pilotable).
Dragons are mythical creatures usually found in a fantasy setting/context. Such creatures can actually exist (flight and flame can both be explained with the storage of flammable, lighter-than-air gases, like methane, in a special organ), but more than that the setting can usually justify their existence one way or another. It is usually the opposite for giant mecha movies.
Post by: Parsely on January 11, 2015, 06:11:36 pm
Really, my main problem with that book is
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: nenjin on January 11, 2015, 06:18:57 pm
Really, my main problem with that book isSpoiler (click to show/hide)
After reading the book, here's my understanding:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on January 11, 2015, 08:12:02 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Vattic on January 11, 2015, 08:22:22 pm
In the third starship troopers movie they have planet killers. As in, full on Alderaan on their asses. But then the next (animated) movie shows the bugs got some new tricks, so no happy ending just yet.I found it jarring how pretty much nobody dies in the animated films. I suppose they were aimed at children, but the contrast with the films made it seem really surreal.
Post by: USEC_OFFICER on January 11, 2015, 08:32:48 pm
I'm assuming you're being sarcastic here, but there is a difference between my statement and yours. Giant robots are presumably man-made, usually in a sci-fi context, thus they should to some extent obey the laws of physics. The types of robots I'm talking about are the humanoid looking ones, which really would not be possible (or pilotable).
Dragons are mythical creatures usually found in a fantasy setting/context. Such creatures can actually exist (flight and flame can both be explained with the storage of flammable, lighter-than-air gases, like methane, in a special organ), but more than that the setting can usually justify their existence one way or another. It is usually the opposite for giant mecha movies.
Which is obviously why you won't watch any movies or shows with FTL travel, telepathy, slower than light lasers, dogfighting spaceships or anything else that is entirely unrealistic and implausable. As opposed to dragons which could totally exist.
Scifi shows don't have to follow the laws of physics, especially if they're soft scifi like the ones giant robot shows usually fall into. They can bend or play with physics using 'science' in pretty much the same way that fantasy does it with magic. How many fantasy shows actually go in-depth into how dragons can exist? They generally violate the square-cube law, and several other things, just as bad as giant robots do. Yet people still accept them without batting an eye or demanding a reason on why they work. So why can't we do the same for mecha? It's just a different set of base assumptions after all. As long as your audience's suspension of disbelief remains intact then you can do pretty much whatever you want, and throw whatever made-up junk you want at them.
In conclusion: Soft scifi is a thing and nobody minds if you don't like giant robot shows because of it. But saying that you don't like them on grounds of realism without clarifying anything beyond that statement will probably earn you many sarcastic replies on the internet. Especially if you turn around and say that dragons could exist.
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 12, 2015, 02:19:15 am
In the third starship troopers movie they have planet killers. As in, full on Alderaan on their asses. But then the next (animated) movie shows the bugs got some new tricks, so no happy ending just yet.I found it jarring how pretty much nobody dies in the animated films. I suppose they were aimed at children, but the contrast with the films made it seem really surreal.
I was referring to the film, 'invasion', which was supposed to be connected to the films I think. Plenty dead there.
People did die in the animated series, but indeed not that often. That death at the end of the series hit rather hard though, and was actually dealt with afteward regarding the impact on the other characters. They do often mention things like 'heavy losses' when talking about the general state of the war, but indeed don't really show troopers get bitten in half.
Really, my main problem with that book isSpoiler (click to show/hide)
After reading the book, here's my understanding:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 12, 2015, 02:27:16 am
I'm assuming you're being sarcastic here, but there is a difference between my statement and yours. Giant robots are presumably man-made, usually in a sci-fi context, thus they should to some extent obey the laws of physics. The types of robots I'm talking about are the humanoid looking ones, which really would not be possible (or pilotable).
Dragons are mythical creatures usually found in a fantasy setting/context. Such creatures can actually exist (flight and flame can both be explained with the storage of flammable, lighter-than-air gases, like methane, in a special organ), but more than that the setting can usually justify their existence one way or another. It is usually the opposite for giant mecha movies.
Which is obviously why you won't watch any movies or shows with FTL travel, telepathy, slower than light lasers, dogfighting spaceships or anything else that is entirely unrealistic and implausable. As opposed to dragons which could totally exist.
Scifi shows don't have to follow the laws of physics, especially if they're soft scifi like the ones giant robot shows usually fall into. They can bend or play with physics using 'science' in pretty much the same way that fantasy does it with magic. How many fantasy shows actually go in-depth into how dragons can exist? They generally violate the square-cube law, and several other things, just as bad as giant robots do. Yet people still accept them without batting an eye or demanding a reason on why they work. So why can't we do the same for mecha? It's just a different set of base assumptions after all. As long as your audience's suspension of disbelief remains intact then you can do pretty much whatever you want, and throw whatever made-up junk you want at them.
In conclusion: Soft scifi is a thing and nobody minds if you don't like giant robot shows because of it. But saying that you don't like them on grounds of realism without clarifying anything beyond that statement will probably earn you many sarcastic replies on the internet. Especially if you turn around and say that dragons could exist.
The point, obviously, is internal consistency. Any development of special materials that might make mechas plausible would also make them redundant. The point is not that they can no exist, the point is that in the logic of the series, they have no reason to exist.
The only reason why you would want to have a giant mech is style points, basically.
Post by: Bohandas on January 12, 2015, 02:29:01 am
He doesn't stop the Nazis. He inadvertently leads them to the Ark and he only survives to the end of the m0vie because of divine intervention.
Post by: Xantalos on January 12, 2015, 02:29:15 am
Spoiler: Radiocontrolled (click to show/hide)
Post by: Bohandas on January 12, 2015, 02:34:12 am
I'm assuming you're being sarcastic here, but there is a difference between my statement and yours. Giant robots are presumably man-made, usually in a sci-fi context, thus they should to some extent obey the laws of physics. The types of robots I'm talking about are the humanoid looking ones, which really would not be possible (or pilotable).
Dragons are mythical creatures usually found in a fantasy setting/context. Such creatures can actually exist (flight and flame can both be explained with the storage of flammable, lighter-than-air gases, like methane, in a special organ), but more than that the setting can usually justify their existence one way or another. It is usually the opposite for giant mecha movies.
Which is obviously why you won't watch any movies or shows with FTL travel, telepathy, slower than light lasers, dogfighting spaceships or anything else that is entirely unrealistic and implausable. As opposed to dragons which could totally exist.
Scifi shows don't have to follow the laws of physics, especially if they're soft scifi like the ones giant robot shows usually fall into. They can bend or play with physics using 'science' in pretty much the same way that fantasy does it with magic. How many fantasy shows actually go in-depth into how dragons can exist? They generally violate the square-cube law, and several other things, just as bad as giant robots do. Yet people still accept them without batting an eye or demanding a reason on why they work. So why can't we do the same for mecha? It's just a different set of base assumptions after all. As long as your audience's suspension of disbelief remains intact then you can do pretty much whatever you want, and throw whatever made-up junk you want at them.
In conclusion: Soft scifi is a thing and nobody minds if you don't like giant robot shows because of it. But saying that you don't like them on grounds of realism without clarifying anything beyond that statement will probably earn you many sarcastic replies on the internet. Especially if you turn around and say that dragons could exist.
The point, obviously, is internal consistency. Any development of special materials that might make mechas plausible would also make them redundant. The point is not that they can no exist, the point is that in the logic of the series, they have no reason to exist.
The only reason why you would want to have a giant mech is style points, basically.
It's definitely ludicrous in a science-fiction setting; even in soft sci-fi. Being an unnecessarily topheavy design and whatnot.
I could see it working in a fantasy setting however, If the controls relied on sympathetic magic or something, making it necessary for the construct to have at least approximately the same shape as its controller.
Post by: Bohandas on January 12, 2015, 02:40:07 am
Spoiler: Saw this comic about the Lord of the Rings films (click to show/hide)
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 12, 2015, 02:58:36 am
Spoiler: Radiocontrolled (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on January 12, 2015, 03:48:14 am
Spoiler: Radiocontrolled (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 12, 2015, 04:00:57 am
Spoiler: Radiocontrolled (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: a more cost efficient plan against zombies (click to show/hide)
Post by: Arx on January 12, 2015, 04:09:40 am
Spoiler: a more cost efficient plan against zombies (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sheb on January 12, 2015, 06:49:44 am
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 12, 2015, 07:42:13 am
Also, you seem to assume that all the zombies were in a few great hordes. They were horde, surely, and crushing them was good PR material, but my guess would be that they weren't the main threat: you just had too much zombies biting civilians everywhere. If you want, the US army won every battle, but lost the war, because the guy manufacturing guns was being chewed by the guy manufacturing bombs.
The discussion was whether that particular scene was ridiculous or not, you are arguing something else.
Though even then, it still doesn't work. Zombies, as depicted by brooks, aren't a threat great enough to warrant the scenario he imagines. The zombie in the movie though, they were. They were also supernatural force, even more so than brooks' zombies, but actually a credible threat.
Post by: Sheb on January 12, 2015, 08:15:16 am
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 12, 2015, 08:20:43 am
Why? As far as I can tell, they're pretty similar, just better at piling up in gigantic zombie flesh ladders.
Superhuman strength, resilience and speed in the movie, next to whatever powers they had in the book (such as laughing at conservation of energy. HAH, laws of physics, what a joke.)
Post by: Urist_McDagger on January 12, 2015, 09:05:12 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 12, 2015, 09:28:44 am
Spoiler alert/movie breakdown
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on January 12, 2015, 10:44:51 am
Why? As far as I can tell, they're pretty similar, just better at piling up in gigantic zombie flesh ladders.
Superhuman strength, resilience and speed in the movie, next to whatever powers they had in the book (such as laughing at conservation of energy. HAH, laws of physics, what a joke.)
Ehh, those are fine in my book. I don't call them magic zombies until they start to basically become immune to things an undead creature should be... For example advanced stages of rot.
Post by: DJ on January 12, 2015, 11:11:40 am
Post by: Fniff on January 12, 2015, 11:31:11 am
The only zombie movie that depicts a zombie outbreak properly, IMO, is 'Shawn of the Dead'Shawn of the Dead is one of my favorite zombie films for that very reason. Also, it's hilarious.
Spoiler alert/movie breakdownSpoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on January 12, 2015, 12:53:14 pm
Don't forget they can survive on the ocean floor without being crushed into a paste but die from a baseball bat to the head.Why? As far as I can tell, they're pretty similar, just better at piling up in gigantic zombie flesh ladders.
Superhuman strength, resilience and speed in the movie, next to whatever powers they had in the book (such as laughing at conservation of energy. HAH, laws of physics, what a joke.)
Post by: Neonivek on January 12, 2015, 01:55:51 pm
Don't forget they can survive on the ocean floor without being crushed into a paste but die from a baseball bat to the head.Why? As far as I can tell, they're pretty similar, just better at piling up in gigantic zombie flesh ladders.
Superhuman strength, resilience and speed in the movie, next to whatever powers they had in the book (such as laughing at conservation of energy. HAH, laws of physics, what a joke.)
Forget that... how about the fact that they can walk on the ocean floor ignoring boyancy, are immune to ocean currents, immune to heavy water salinization, immune to the freezing temperatures, immune to the lack of sunlight, and immune to the erosion and harsh underwater environment.
There are so many things that prevent a zombie from reasonably walking across the ocean floor that it is mind boggling.
Which would be fine if it wasn't meant to be "realistic".
This is a good place to criticize TV shows, right?
Yeah might as well.
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 12, 2015, 02:41:46 pm
Quote
Which would be fine if it wasn't meant to be "realistic".
From the zombie survival guide, also by brooks, featuring the same kind of zombies:
Quote
Too often, the undead have been said to possess superhuman powers: unusual strength, lightning speed, telepathy, etc. Stories range from zombies flying through the air to their scaling vertical surfaces like spiders. While these traits might make for fascinating drama, the individual ghoul is far from a magical, omnipotent demon. Never forget that the body of the undead is, for all practical purposes, human. What changes do occur are in the way this new, reanimated body is used by the now-infected brain. There is no way a zombie could fly unless the human it used to be could fly. The same goes for projecting force fields, teleportation, moving through solid objects, transforming into a wolf, breathing fire, or a variety of other mystical talents attributed to the walking dead. Imagine the human body as a tool kit. The solanumbulist brain has those tools, and only those tools, at its disposal. It cannot create new ones out of thin air. But it can, as you will see, use these tools in unconventional combinations, or push their durability beyond normal human limits.
So as it turns out, we already had the power to negate entropy within ourselves, we just had to believe.
Post by: Sheb on January 12, 2015, 02:46:53 pm
Post by: Neonivek on January 12, 2015, 02:50:56 pm
It is usually that zombies lack the limiters human beings have on their strength.
Mind you the reason human beings have those limiters is because using all of ones strength is a great way to destroy your muscles in a single go... but still.
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 12, 2015, 02:56:16 pm
Zombie's unusual strength is actually quite human.
It is usually that zombies lack the limiters human beings have on their strength.
Mind you the reason human beings have those limiters is because using all of ones strength is a great way to destroy your muscles in a single go... but still.
I'm sorry, but no. Them zombies display feats that are quite litteraly impossible. As in, survive pressures even a tank wouldn't. It's not just beyonf biology, it's beyond physics and common sense. Which I could live with, but then for the love of god, don't have the audacity to call them 'realistic zombies' or 'plausible scenarios'.
Post by: Neonivek on January 12, 2015, 03:03:06 pm
Then spoke about other features zombies have done that is unrealistic... unrelated to what I was talking about.
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 12, 2015, 03:17:34 pm
I am confused as to your actual objection as it seems entirely unrelated to what you referring to... only that you seem to have quoted me talking about how "unusual strength" is usually not unrealistic.
Then spoke about other features zombies have done that is unrealistic... unrelated to what I was talking about.
It was a general complaint, that they do impossible things that are then explained away as due to not having human limiters. But sure, if you want a specific example: even if you boost raw physical strength of a human to max, that doesn't mean that a muscle, once ripped, can still be used. Or that their jaw seems powerful enough to bite through just about anything. There's hard limits on what a human body, even when pushed to the max, can do, and these zombies happily waltz over that limit.
Post by: Neonivek on January 12, 2015, 03:38:06 pm
Mind you... that is still enough strength to
-Bite off your fingers and break any bone in your hand
-Crush your throat whether by finger or bite
-Mangle your arms or legs
-Death Grip! nearly impossible to remove
-Do the sprint of a well trained athlete
-Break bones with single slams
-Gouge out eyes
-Bite through raw flesh
Human strength without its limiters is quite loose in what it can do.
It isn't like those weird psychics who use "100% of their brain when people only use 10%" which is not only factually incorrect... but seemingly gives them abilities FAR beyond anything the mind is capable of.
Post by: Sheb on January 12, 2015, 04:09:03 pm
Post by: NullForceOmega on January 12, 2015, 04:18:16 pm
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 12, 2015, 04:48:34 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 12, 2015, 05:00:23 pm
On a side note, people would not become pancakes, they'd shrivel up.
Anyway, compressive strength of bone is 1800 kgf/cm², or 176 580 000 N/m^2, so that's not going to break.
Post by: Sheb on January 12, 2015, 05:07:11 pm
If mean, fishes do all right, why do you think the human body would fail?
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 12, 2015, 05:09:56 pm
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 12, 2015, 05:12:11 pm
Post by: smjjames on January 12, 2015, 05:17:32 pm
Post by: Sergius on January 12, 2015, 05:17:39 pm
It isn't like those weird psychics who use "100% of their brain when people only use 10%" which is not only factually incorrect... but seemingly gives them abilities FAR beyond anything the mind is capable of.
That's because they got it backwards. Zombies use only 1% of their brain, and that is what gives them superpowers.
We need to learn how to use 1% of our brains. We should start by studying reality show stars.
Post by: Sheb on January 12, 2015, 05:19:14 pm
10ebbor10: It's mostly water, so it can be assumed it's the same as water, aka not much.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 12, 2015, 05:28:08 pm
The temperature would be a bigger problem, not to mention the fact that you would float.
Post by: smjjames on January 12, 2015, 05:34:00 pm
Post by: Sheb on January 12, 2015, 05:38:58 pm
However, suggesting it's walk is silly. Have you ever tried walking at the bottom of a pool? You have very little traction, and lots of drag. Maybe they drag themselves on all four on the muddy bottom.
Post by: smjjames on January 12, 2015, 05:47:11 pm
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 12, 2015, 06:09:22 pm
Post by: Parsely on January 12, 2015, 07:53:11 pm
Post by: Il Palazzo on January 13, 2015, 06:57:50 am
They wouldn't be able to stand though, their legs wouldn't be able to handle that kind of load. What was it 440 atm? That's a lot of weight on zed
Cryxis, you don't understand how pressure work. The water above you is pushing you down, but the water below you is pushing you up with the same force. Otherwise you couldn't float underwater.To reiterate, you don't get crushed from above. There pressure from above is actually lower than from any other side. The difference is the source of buoyancy and what allows balloons to fly.
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 13, 2015, 11:13:49 am
Post by: Sheb on January 13, 2015, 11:15:34 am
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 13, 2015, 11:16:35 am
Post by: Tiruin on January 13, 2015, 11:16:45 am
sigh... can we agree its just impossible for zed to be moveing about a mile underwaterEven a hundred meters under--yes. And even lesser than that, yes. :P
Pressure and the interaction of a living force (sans presence of air in the body...as long as it can move, which is already against the laws of nature given the mechanisms of the body) doesn't show well in movies. I like that its offscreen. >_>
Post by: Fniff on January 13, 2015, 11:18:17 am
It's just a weird mystery no-one can figure out.
From a writing perspective, it's a device to make the zombies more of a threat. Because if they couldn't do that, you could just go to an island and avoid them forever which would seem like the obvious solution.
Post by: Neonivek on January 13, 2015, 11:23:01 am
From a writing perspective, it's a device to make the zombies more of a threat. Because if they couldn't do that, you could just go to an island and avoid them forever which would seem like the obvious solution.
Ohh yeah... having all of society collapse... No threat at all. :P
Though I don't know why this scenario MUST lead to everyone being dead.
Also food is a big deal.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 13, 2015, 11:24:34 am
Post by: Fniff on January 13, 2015, 11:28:46 am
Well, it's like Pandemic. The majority of humanity may be dead... but Madagascar still exists and don't have to deal with zombies at all.From a writing perspective, it's a device to make the zombies more of a threat. Because if they couldn't do that, you could just go to an island and avoid them forever which would seem like the obvious solution.
Ohh yeah... having all of society collapse... No threat at all. :P
Though I don't know why this scenario MUST lead to everyone being dead.
Also food is a big deal.
I mean, it's a complete failure for humanity, would quickly result in supply problems, and would make a pretty interesting base for a story to jump off from (Though there's been a few stories focused on the idea of the last hospitable place after the apocalypse, Day of the Dead is a good example) but it isn't the kind of story Max Brooks was intending to write. So, the zombies needed a way to pop up anywhere he needed them to be. Hence, inexplicable walking across the ocean floor.
Maybe they float?In the book some of them do. They either have life jackets on or they are in a stage of decomposition where gas allows them to float.
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 13, 2015, 11:49:33 am
Post by: Neonivek on January 13, 2015, 11:56:09 am
can nit picks that ruined video games go here too?
Sure.
In fact, it seems that I, somehow, thought of this in advance as the opening post is
Quote
What are your movies, games, or anything where a single small detail seems to derail your enjoyment?
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 13, 2015, 12:08:02 pm
The fact that the battlefield 4 singleplayer campaign was only like 4-5 missions and maybe 6 hours long ruined it
it was a good campaign as i was playing it but when it ended I couldn't play it again knowing it was that terrible
Post by: Glloyd on January 13, 2015, 03:09:04 pm
Post by: Neonivek on January 13, 2015, 03:14:26 pm
I feel like that kind of discussion could fall under the gaming pet peeves thread in Other Games, but that's just my opinion.
Gaming Pet Peeves is more about things games, in general, do that bug you.
While this is more about those tiny details, whether a flaw or not, that somehow ruins or severely weakens the whole experience of specific games, movies, shows, and what have you.
Though if you want to create a new thread "Nitpicks that ruined Games" you have my blessing.
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 13, 2015, 04:56:01 pm
It was pretty well done IMO but it's shortness just kinda killed how good it was, if they had made it what used to be the normal 12 or even better the old norm 48 or the even older norm like 2 weeks campaign it would have been so much more enjoyable and replay able
Post by: Sergius on January 14, 2015, 04:04:10 pm
The "Marvel Anime" series, they all feature an heroic, unknown japanese character that borders on the Mary Sue, which befriends or earns the respect of the main Marvel protagonist (or becomes a love interest), and then dies tragically near the end (performing a heroic sacrifice, usually), which is a terrible blow to the hero, who then proceeds to deliver some sort of eulogy about how there's great people in Japan also, and other rubbish about honor and We're Not So Different After All and blech.
I don't oppose it on principle, but it's not very subtle. At least in the X-Men one they used an existing Marvel character called Armor (which still seems to be the POV character for the viewers) and doesn't die at the end, but still proves to be completely crucial to the solution of the plot for being a special snowflake somehow.
There's also always a tragic japanese villain, of course, but that's at least to be expected and not terrible IMO. I also hate the super ninja assassin with Wolverine-like regeneration powers that shows in half of the series as "honourable antivillain who then teams up temporarily and everyone thinks is supercool even tho he remorselessly killed innocent people close to the hero".
Post by: Rolan7 on January 14, 2015, 10:55:57 pm
Even if Yoda did anticipate Order 66 (which I don't think he did until it was given because the clones were programmed not to be aware of their traitorous tendency or something), by the time he was aware of the mass Jedi elimination task, what could he have done to stop it? Even if he did somehow realize that all the clones had been indoctrinated this way, and he also somehow rallied all the master Jedi from all the different fronts they were scattered across during that time in the war, what could he have changed?
In the Clone Wars cartoon... Wow, actually I don't remember this nearly as clearly as I thought. Not going to let that stop me though!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Parsely on January 15, 2015, 05:14:44 am
Post by: Caz on January 15, 2015, 06:39:49 am
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 15, 2015, 07:31:38 am
Edge of Tomorrow when they're escaping by car. Why didn't they shoot him AS SOON as he got the location of the hive mind thing?This
So much this
Post by: Culise on January 15, 2015, 10:09:15 am
Spoiler: Spoilers (click to show/hide)
Post by: Fniff on January 15, 2015, 10:35:03 am
Spoiler: Explanation? I only have vague memories of the film (click to show/hide)
Post by: scriver on January 15, 2015, 11:30:20 am
That was posted a long time ago but IIRC (that is, without looking back to actually see what I was replying to :P) someone was wondering why Yoda didn't anticipate Order 66 sooner since he's surrounded with clones and has brain powers, and my thoughts were that, even if he could have, it wouldn't have made much difference in the long term (and if you add in the cartoon then it totally didn't).
I always assumed Yoda didn't anticipate anything but felt "a disturbance in the Force" as his Jedi brethren was being killed off en masse, and thus was show to turn the tables on the soldiers in the last minute. He does that little "something is very wrong" gesture just before they attack him, iirc.
Post by: i2amroy on January 15, 2015, 01:43:09 pm
The general feeling that I'm getting from the internet is that it was a combination of the "try to get as far forward in a single day as you can" as opposed to "quick saves" and the huge adrenaline rush both of them would undergo on finding out where the alpha was impairing their thinking.Edge of Tomorrow when they're escaping by car. Why didn't they shoot him AS SOON as he got the location of the hive mind thing?This
So much this
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 15, 2015, 02:39:27 pm
One of them is a highly trained soldier and the other might as well be at that pointThe general feeling that I'm getting from the internet is that it was a combination of the "try to get as far forward in a single day as you can" as opposed to "quick saves" and the huge adrenaline rush both of them would undergo on finding out where the alpha was impairing their thinking.Edge of Tomorrow when they're escaping by car. Why didn't they shoot him AS SOON as he got the location of the hive mind thing?This
So much this
They aught to have known how to control themselves
but meh
Post by: LordBaal on January 15, 2015, 02:57:50 pm
The trick, if I remember correctly was that yes, those secrets orders where in a really fine and secret print, and the powers for triggering it. All other secret orders were pretty standard in the likes of the Jedi Council and Senate needing approval. Only 66 was able to be activated by a single person, the chancellor.
Also, 66 is worded in such specific way that might seem "innocent" and regular among other extremist orders, but in detail it gives no quarter to the jedi, no trial or anything, there's no "if", it points directly at lethal force. I guess the Jedi order had a really crappy legal department when signed that bargain. :P
Also, I know the first pages of this thread deal with it more than 2 years ago. But avatar really grind my gears....
I'll set aside the ultimate impossibility of playing legos with alien and human DNA and coming up with something that doesn't beg to be killed or at the very least that is fucking dangerous beyond reason. Let's ride with it because it's actually very cool.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So sorry James Cameron but I keep siding with my own race damn it. I know, there's interference on the religious site but why the fuck attack it in such a rushed and stupid way anyway? The new excavators would take 3 months to get there (there's a scene on the extended edition which show the natives have destroyed the excavators that almost ruined the protagonist morning after sex and killed every escorting soldier), do they ran out the mine near the base?
I think Quaritch made a mistake moving out, the base defenses would have resisted 1000 or 20000 natives I guess, but granted, it was a gamble and he couldn't know the deux ex machina of the very questionable biology god would herd the animals against him. Also it's doubtful the animals would have attacked the base too, but even if they had, it's stated the base has a clear perimeter with sonic fences, heavy weaponized turrets and missiles guidance would have worked far better. It would have been a complete kill zone.
But let's ran with the idea of the attack, after all the plan worked until the animal assault. WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU SEND IN TROOPS TO A PLACE YOU ARE GOING TO BOMB? Ok, they weren't precisely right next to it, but what the fuck? I would see some logic behind it if you had enough troops to surround the whole place and kill everyone trying to scape the bombardment or lacking that, yeah deploy a single line, but AFTER the bombing you fucker, so they can clean up. But in this case why bother?? Why even bother trying to get on the ground? The objective was to destroy the place not cleaning up to start civilian operations right away, which would, in the best cases had not all of them died in the stupid way they did, be scheduled to start three months away.
Yeah they are just a security force from a company, not an proper army, but it's stated most if not all are former military, I guess, given the size and importance of the operation, that would have included a few officers that were trained in strategy and tactics wouldn't you think?
I would wish for a version of Avatar 2 were we have one of the "venture star" ships comes along with a orbital mac cannon and simply trow a "god rod" to the place from orbit, be done with it and restart heavier militarized mining operations. But that would need a lot of time like posted on the first pages of this thread (which makes me wonder, how long does the natives live?, the traitor might as well be death of old age by the time they get there). But of course James "I'm secretly an tree hugger elf" Cameron wouldn't allow it.
As for the battle itself. Let's run with the idea they go there. LEFT YOUR GROUND TROOPS IN THE BASE! Why risk all your equipment and most personnel on this way? Again, why the fuck bring ground troops? Oh that's right, so the movie makes the obvious point of bad industry man more blatant... anyway... I think bringing 50~75% of the helicopters, splitting the formation in two parts, one advanced screen and another rear guard with the Valkyrie AND NO GROUD TROOPS would have worked better. Then after the flying lizard natives engage the screen group the back guard one will thrust forwards and bomb the place.
Hell they could have even attacked with two or more Valkyries and at least one would have done it, as it is stated the shuttles don't go back, they stay on Pandora and are used to skim on the giant gas uppermost atmosphere scooping hydrogen or something. And in case something goes wrong, you have a fully staffed base to retreat to, which again would be a complete kill zone.
And in fact, they are mere seconds from the site, or practically over it when the shuttle go down. Wouldn't that result in the same thing, the place being obliterated not only by those huge chemical, open sky mining bombs, but also by what is basically a flying fusion bomb? (the shuttles are said on the official wiki to have fusion power plants).
On a different side of the movie, why the natives have only 4 limbs when every single animal has 6? It's very obvious they are either truly native (the USB ports they share with most fauna shows that) or maybe the product of genetic engineering. I entertain the idea of the humans interfering with some kind of experiment of another far more advance and powerful race that might or might not be still around, and if they are, they would be either pretty pissed off or amused by the show. Or perhaps the natives are what is left of an alien ship that crash landed there and performed genetic engineering on them to adapt the environment and eventually ran out of tech/supplies and with countless generations forgot all that and became hunter gatherers.
There's some theory around the internet based on the monkeys that have their upper limbs fused at the point of the elbow shown at the first jungle scenes, that the natives might have "advanced" more down that path and a X-ray of them would reveal their arms actually have two fussed humerus, and the same with the ulna and radius. But no one in the movie bothers to ask that, or even mention it. So the theory something artificially fishy is going on with those natives stands...
Post by: Xantalos on January 15, 2015, 03:13:25 pm
Post by: Neonivek on January 15, 2015, 03:21:54 pm
In order for it to be executed it needed the A-OK from the Senate and on paper order 66 was actually kind of fine.
If the Jedi were a rogue order, it would be helpful.
Post by: LordBaal on January 15, 2015, 03:31:07 pm
:o
Post by: Sergius on January 15, 2015, 03:46:28 pm
On a different side of the movie, why the natives have only 4 limbs when every single animal has 6? It's very obvious they are either truly native (the USB ports they share with most fauna shows that) or maybe the product of genetic engineering. I entertain the idea of the humans interfering with some kind of experiment of another far more advance and powerful race that might or might not be still around, and if they are, they would be either pretty pissed off or amused by the show.
There's some theory around the internet based on the monkeys having their upper limbs fused at the point of the elbow that the natives might have "advanced" more down that path and a X-ray of them would reveal their arms actually have two fussed humerus, and the same with the ulna and radius. But no one in the movie bothers to ask that, or even mention it. So the theory something artificially fishy is going on with those natives stands...
Pretty sure WoG states that they went that route deliberately for entirely out-of-universe reasons, so that the audience could connect more with the characters not being so alien. So they're part of the native life but look 99% human. :P
Post by: LordBaal on January 15, 2015, 03:51:29 pm
Yes it might be, but it ticks me off they didn't bothered with some half arsed explanation to hold some internal logic over it.On a different side of the movie, why the natives have only 4 limbs when every single animal has 6? It's very obvious they are either truly native (the USB ports they share with most fauna shows that) or maybe the product of genetic engineering. I entertain the idea of the humans interfering with some kind of experiment of another far more advance and powerful race that might or might not be still around, and if they are, they would be either pretty pissed off or amused by the show.
There's some theory around the internet based on the monkeys having their upper limbs fused at the point of the elbow that the natives might have "advanced" more down that path and a X-ray of them would reveal their arms actually have two fussed humerus, and the same with the ulna and radius. But no one in the movie bothers to ask that, or even mention it. So the theory something artificially fishy is going on with those natives stands...
Pretty sure WoG states that they went that route deliberately for entirely out-of-universe reasons, so that the audience could connect more with the characters not being so alien. So they're part of the native life but look 99% human. :P
Post by: i2amroy on January 15, 2015, 03:55:05 pm
If the Jedi were a rogue order, it would be helpful.This reason alone is part of the reason such an order would exist. Look at our military today, they have created and filed plans dealing with every crazy situation ranging from a zombie apocalypse to what they need to do if the girl scouts rise against america. This also includes plans to deal with any single one of our allies or enemies should they declare war or do a variety of other things. I would not be at all surprised if the Council had a built in plan somewhere for dealing with the jedi if they threatened galactic peace. And really looking at the original text the basic thing just says "if the jedi attack the leader of the republic then he gets full control of the military until a new command base is established. (At which point he told them to kill all the jedi).
Post by: Baffler on January 15, 2015, 04:02:55 pm
Post by: Parsely on January 15, 2015, 06:28:06 pm
Post by: Neonivek on January 15, 2015, 06:51:39 pm
Historically, my gramps saw Avatar and said: "It's basically Fern Gully."
Yeah!... well not really.
Only in superficial qualities (in that it is about a human who is shrunk so he is fairy sized against an environmental monster)
Post by: Bohandas on January 15, 2015, 08:39:38 pm
Historically, my gramps saw Avatar and said: "It's basically Fern Gully."
I had that exact same thought!
It really is exactly the same plot as Fern Gully, except with technobabble instead of magic.
Post by: Xantalos on January 15, 2015, 08:42:17 pm
Quaritch and Hexxus are around the same level of sexy...Historically, my gramps saw Avatar and said: "It's basically Fern Gully."
I had that exact same thought!
It really is exactly the same plot as Fern Gully, except with technobabble instead of magic.
Post by: i2amroy on January 15, 2015, 11:13:46 pm
Except we all know it's really just Dances with Wolves IN SPACE with the "right" people winning this time. :PHistorically, my gramps saw Avatar and said: "It's basically Fern Gully."
I had that exact same thought!
It really is exactly the same plot as Fern Gully, except with technobabble instead of magic.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 16, 2015, 02:32:08 am
Really, the thing is everywhere, from Avatar, to the Bible, to Star Wars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth
Post by: LordBaal on January 16, 2015, 07:14:54 am
Also very "fixable" if you have a mac cannon pointing the dwelling of said "hero" and he has no way to know you are up there.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 16, 2015, 07:54:03 am
Post by: Neonivek on January 16, 2015, 08:10:49 am
Welcome to Joseph Campbell's Monomyth.
Really, the thing is everywhere, from Avatar, to the Bible, to Star Wars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth
Really? The Bible has a mother goddess? Any of the characters has went into the underworld? Which ones refused the call?
The trick is that because you HAVE to stretch it to apply to everything all you have to do is relax the elements.
And once you relax the elements you just get a basic plot layout that applies to almost anything.
Character sees something, character does something, Character sees someone, something bad happens, something good happens, the end... In any order
Above is the monomyth boiled down to all the details people look at.
Post by: Sergius on January 16, 2015, 08:19:39 am
Post by: LordBaal on January 16, 2015, 08:49:21 am
?That I would like to see that. Avatar 2. The RDA comes back with a ship fitted with a MAC cannon. They shoot the darn tree, hopefully killing that traitor, end of the monomyth. Restart mining operations with even heavier military support. Perhaps even some government and heavier weapons support, now that the natives are proven threats to humanity. End of movie. I know it would be a really bad and short movie, but it would also be probably what would happen in real life.
Post by: Il Palazzo on January 16, 2015, 09:26:39 am
I know it would be a really bad and short movie, but it would also be probably what would happen in real life.What you do, is make another movie about mostly unrelated stuff but in the same or similar universe, and have at some point some characters mention off-hand a successful mining operation on the planet Pandora that some PETA activists are trying to boycott due to alleged wildlife preservation issues or something.
Post by: LordBaal on January 16, 2015, 09:33:06 am
:P hahahaha that's a good one!I know it would be a really bad and short movie, but it would also be probably what would happen in real life.What you do, is make another movie about mostly unrelated stuff but in the same or similar universe, and have at some point some characters mention off-hand a successful mining operation on the planet Pandora that some PETA activists are trying to boycott due to alleged wildlife preservation issues or something.
Post by: Rolan7 on January 16, 2015, 10:23:40 am
Welcome to Joseph Campbell's Monomyth.
Really, the thing is everywhere, from Avatar, to the Bible, to Star Wars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth
Really? The Bible has a mother goddess? Any of the characters has went into the underworld? Which ones refused the call?
The trick is that because you HAVE to stretch it to apply to everything all you have to do is relax the elements.
And once you relax the elements you just get a basic plot layout that applies to almost anything.
Character sees something, character does something, Character sees someone, something bad happens, something good happens, the end... In any order
Above is the monomyth boiled down to all the details people look at.
They do say "Very few myths contain all 17 of the stages". Which makes it even easier to fit vastly different stories into the framework, of course. I still think it's a fun exercise and highlights common elements in most stories.
Well, until I actually read the steps and Campbell's comments on them. Wow. Not only are these steps metaphorically (even misleadingly) named, they're tied to some disturbing, obsolete concepts. It's understandable since he was talking about ancient myths I guess, but even then he's shoehorning them into meanings I'm not sure match the original intent. And the overuse of metaphor to stretch the connections makes it hard to take seriously.
I was going to say that the Virgin Mary is a Mother Goddess, and that Jesus goes to the underworld. But the Goddess step isn't about a goddess at all! It's about unconditional love, usually from the love interest, which unites the spiritual hero with the worldly world. Campbell just calls the step "The Meeting with the Goddess", presumably because unconditional love is a divine trait in a woman.
But just... read his comments on that section. Again, he's talking about ancient myths, but... ugh. He did specifically try to fit Jesus into these somehow. It can work if you consider "The Queen Goddess of the World" to be his apostles, which I think highlights the absurdity of his metaphors. I don't know if that's what he claims, or if he just made a bunch of assumptions about Mary Magdalene.
This touches on at least two topics with high derail potential... If that happens I'll make a Monomyth thread.
Post by: Neonivek on January 16, 2015, 10:28:16 am
This falls under a sort of George Orwell staple called "People misattributing his work far beyond his intent to an absolute predictive template". Taking his work which is a loose generalization and upgrading it to an outright template that almost all fiction "must" be following.
Post by: LordBaal on January 16, 2015, 10:39:21 am
If that happens I'll make a Monomyth thread.Which I promptly blow up with a MAC cannon. :P
The basic criticizing towards that is here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth#Criticism)
Post by: Bohandas on January 16, 2015, 11:25:51 am
Welcome to Joseph Campbell's Monomyth.
Really, the thing is everywhere, from Avatar, to the Bible, to Star Wars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth
The monomyth is nothing more than a bunch of generic barnum statements.
It's like if I said that all stories can ne reduced to the one story "something happens".
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 16, 2015, 11:29:15 am
Welcome to Joseph Campbell's Monomyth.
Really, the thing is everywhere, from Avatar, to the Bible, to Star Wars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth
The monomyth is nothing more than a bunch of generic barnum statements.
It's like if I said that all stories can ne reduced to the one story "something happens".
"The Bohandas Theorem."
Post by: Fniff on January 16, 2015, 04:05:04 pm
Post by: i2amroy on January 16, 2015, 11:41:37 pm
Course IIRC they've got something like 14 more years before the first ship gets back to earth (during which point they've got to other ships that they have to drive off that are unaware of what they have done). Then probably at least another year before the governing body gets their asses in gear to support the operation. Then another 14 or so years before that ship gets back. That's at least another 30 years or so to come up with some sort of a counter method. (Or maybe even longer if some hippy groups here about the intended genocide of an alien life form. SAVE THE NOBLE SAVAGE NA'VI! STOP CONGRESSIONAL MURDER! :P) And if you consider that they are sitting on huge reservoirs of power producing materials and they have access to the networks of the original operation (which I wouldn't be surprised if they had blueprints for anything the company thought they needed), I wouldn't be too surprised if they were able to cobble together some sort of defense against that.?That I would like to see that. Avatar 2. The RDA comes back with a ship fitted with a MAC cannon. They shoot the darn tree, hopefully killing that traitor, end of the monomyth. Restart mining operations with even heavier military support. Perhaps even some government and heavier weapons support, now that the natives are proven threats to humanity. End of movie. I know it would be a really bad and short movie, but it would also be probably what would happen in real life.
Post by: scriver on January 17, 2015, 03:51:11 am
Post by: Sheb on January 17, 2015, 04:28:10 am
Post by: Xantalos on January 17, 2015, 04:36:03 am
The Arachnids being from Starship Troopers. Now that'd be amusing.
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 17, 2015, 05:31:27 am
A movie I'd like to see is an Arachnid colonization pod drop down onto Pandora.
The Arachnids being from Starship Troopers. Now that'd be amusing.
A drop pod full of Altered yo.
Post by: Xantalos on January 17, 2015, 05:37:27 am
Post by: Jopax on January 17, 2015, 06:15:22 am
Harvest all that tasty biomass.
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 17, 2015, 06:17:59 am
Tyrannids.
Harvest all that tasty biomass.
The Altered are Tyranids on steroids. Massive, massive doses of steroids.
Post by: Fniff on January 17, 2015, 06:23:45 am
I would say a few xenomorph eggs, but they have a misfortunate effect of laying eggs in dark, rarely visited places that you can't find. A few of those dropped into Pandora would almost certainly wipe out most things on it, but would leave an unfortunate mess to clean up. If only there was some sort of fertility shutoff switch.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 17, 2015, 06:46:08 am
Massive population expansion collapses the ecosystem.
Post by: Xantalos on January 17, 2015, 06:49:57 am
From just pure forum stuff, the Altered from Einsteinian Roulette are like the Thing, but with a universal hivemind and bullshit physics-breaking powers.
...
There's also the Flood from Halo now that I think about it, they're on about the same level as the Altered.
Post by: Fniff on January 17, 2015, 06:55:46 am
If only aliens couldn't lay their own eggs.
Post by: Xantalos on January 17, 2015, 06:59:17 am
Hmm.
Honestly bio weapons on the scale of entire planets generally are too dangerous to use since they tend to spread offworld and fuck everything over.
There is the Life-Eater virus from 40k, it reduces everything organic on the planet to highly flammable sludge that promptly gets set on fire from orbit, burning the atmosphere away. They don't use it much, if only because it makes Nurgle stronger.
Post by: Fniff on January 17, 2015, 07:03:33 am
Post by: Xantalos on January 17, 2015, 07:08:54 am
Shoggoths could kinda be considered bioweapons, kinda. More like biological construction robots, though.
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 17, 2015, 07:41:07 am
From widely published media I'd say John Carpenter's Thing as I said earlier, if only because it's so versatile; a single cell can start off a thing that'll eat the entire planet, and if it's dropped anywhere near sources of biomass it'll quickly spread out of control. A jungle would be a nightmare scenario if the Thing got into it. Tyranids might out eat it on most levels, but theyre more a mobile ecosystem - if you drop a basic Gaunt into a jungle it'll cause damage sure, but it'll die eventually and it won't really have a lasting effect. The Thing'll have assimilated the whole thing in a week tops.
From just pure forum stuff, the Altered from Einsteinian Roulette are like the Thing, but with a universal hivemind and bullshit physics-breaking powers.
...
There's also the Flood from Halo now that I think about it, they're on about the same level as the Altered.
Flood need sentient minds to reproduce, I think; Altered have no need for such luxuries!
Thing is, in this scenario, we would need a bioweapon that kills everything then politely disperses into nothing. The Thing is effective, but it can go into stasis and god knows what it does with the biomass of a planet. Besides, it can reproduce asexually.
If only aliens couldn't lay their own eggs.
Drop an algae (or fungus, or whatever bioconstruct you need) that grows so quickly it's ridiculous, can act as a parasite on local fauna/flora, yet is very poisonous to eat for the natives (or at least, for the blue elves). Watch them starve out the natives, then spray whatever chemicals activate their molecular kill switch. Or just ignore the stuff and mine as needed.
Basicaly, kill them by outcompeting them or something, not via outright killing (since those things could then kill you if you go down to the planet).
Post by: Xantalos on January 17, 2015, 07:48:07 am
Then once they get to high enough concentrations they just start editing reality to better suit them.
I suppose their hax artifacts also helped there.
Post by: DJ on January 17, 2015, 08:01:56 am
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 17, 2015, 08:02:26 am
They sorta do? From what I got from Greg Bear's interpretation and what I've seen in general they can use biomass just fine, but they need brains, or as I suspect, intelligence - sci fi souls basically - in order to open the door for the insane space gods that are the hivemind behind the Flood.
Then once they get to high enough concentrations they just start editing reality to better suit them.
I suppose their hax artifacts also helped there.
Then why did they go dormant when the halo device killed all sentient species? It didn't kill all Flood, but they also coildn't just nom the galaxy while it was repopulating.
Mind, my knowledge of halo universe is spotty at best.
Bioweapon? Just more humans. Spread a rumor that natives' bones are a powerful aphrodisiac and offer free rides to anyone who wants to go hunting.
But Spacetrips are expensive!
Post by: Xantalos on January 17, 2015, 08:24:08 am
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 17, 2015, 08:28:57 am
They didn't go dormant as far as I can tell, they got outright killed by it, but the Halos basically deleted the concept of sentience from the galaxy when they were activated, so no biggie there. The Flood that we see in the games got put into timelocks by some of the Forerunners because ... they were trying to study it to see if they could cure it or something? I dunno, some certain forerunners were so actively fucktarded I suspect the HMRC was piloting their actions.
I'm gonna make that my headcannon now. Anytime a supposedly ancient civilisation does something really goddamn retarded, say their equivalent of the hmrc was responsible.
Post by: DJ on January 17, 2015, 08:29:46 am
Trip there is free, but you recoup your money on the ticket back home.Bioweapon? Just more humans. Spread a rumor that natives' bones are a powerful aphrodisiac and offer free rides to anyone who wants to go hunting.
But Spacetrips are expensive!
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 17, 2015, 08:34:28 am
Post by: Xantalos on January 17, 2015, 08:39:29 am
Quote
Hey, you know that weapon that assaults the physical concept of the grander living universe so badly it seemingly withdraws all thought from the volume of space affected?He made a killing during the Forerunner-Flood war by rescuing ships that had been in combat and fixing them up, then reselling them at a higher price. Of course since he was a lazy fucker, he didn't have the ships inspected thoroughly enough so the dormant Flood on the ship always came back, infested the crew working there, and started fucking everything up.
He kept the Flood war a secret from the majority of the Ecumene for 300 years before it clusterfucked so wildly it started overrunning the galaxy.
At one point he dumped the effective military commander of the entire Ecumene in an area the Flood had occupied to the point that FTL travel no longer worked, essentially giving them perfect access to all their plans, as a political move.
No way he wasn't HMRC material.
Post by: Sheb on January 17, 2015, 09:32:32 am
Post by: Radio Controlled on January 17, 2015, 10:04:19 am
HMRC? Her Majesty Revenue and Customs?
Hazardous materials requisition corps, from einsteinian roulette, aka the best rtd this side of the galactic equator.
Post by: Neonivek on January 17, 2015, 10:31:02 am
From widely published media I'd say John Carpenter's Thing as I said earlier, if only because it's so versatile; a single cell can start off a thing that'll eat the entire planet, and if it's dropped anywhere near sources of biomass it'll quickly spread out of control.
Well not exactly. The Thing is a lot more vulnerable then that (even if it tends to be upgraded in... every other media...). I cannot take a host over from a single cell and needs quite a few of them. As well the Thing actually has a size limit.
But yeah it would be kind of impossible to contain if it did start off in a jungle (assuming it can infect plant matter which speculation is... it can't). The only way to contain it at that point would be to firebomb it.
Post by: Bohandas on January 17, 2015, 01:24:39 pm
What's the best alien from scifi to use as a bioweapon?
I would say a few xenomorph eggs, but they have a misfortunate effect of laying eggs in dark, rarely visited places that you can't find. A few of those dropped into Pandora would almost certainly wipe out most things on it, but would leave an unfortunate mess to clean up. If only there was some sort of fertility shutoff switch.
Cloverfield
Post by: Arx on January 17, 2015, 01:55:21 pm
*There are probably actually many comparable. I imagine the Tyranids might be similar.
Post by: Sergius on January 17, 2015, 02:03:14 pm
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on January 17, 2015, 02:36:38 pm
Post by: Sebastian2203 on January 17, 2015, 04:08:35 pm
Every average movie decides once someone closes his eyes he is dead ....
You are out of oxygen for 2 minutes? Screw that! Screw CPR he's dead.
You have been hit by crowbar to head 3 times .... Sure our bones are paper you are dead.
You are shot in chest , screw body functions it's 60% chance bullet misses vital body parts but who cares
Post by: Neonivek on January 17, 2015, 04:29:10 pm
Quote
You are out of oxygen for 2 minutes?
2 minutes? Usually they do it for like... 30 seconds.
Post by: Bohandas on January 17, 2015, 04:58:13 pm
I hate how movies overhype vulnerability of human body, I mean we kinda are but we are also strong in many areas and movies fail to capture that.
Every average movie decides once someone closes his eyes he is dead ....
You are out of oxygen for 2 minutes? Screw that! Screw CPR he's dead.
You have been hit by crowbar to head 3 times .... Sure our bones are paper you are dead.
You are shot in chest , screw body functions it's 60% chance bullet misses vital body parts but who cares
You shoud watch Kung-Pow: Enter the Fist, there's a scene towards the end that makes fun of the first of these things.
Post by: Neonivek on January 17, 2015, 05:06:21 pm
Post by: Bohandas on January 18, 2015, 07:36:50 pm
Post by: Parsely on January 18, 2015, 08:29:18 pm
Post by: Neonivek on January 18, 2015, 09:42:41 pm
Indiana Jones' idealistic attitude about the preservation of ancient artifacts in The Last Crusade seems out of character for a guy who spent the first ten minutes of the previous movie (Temple of Doom) selling relics to the chinese mafia.
The problem is that to anyone who knows a lot about Archeology he is kind of a terrible archeologist
Often doing irreparable damage to what is frankly... the more interesting and important artifacts for ones that have bigger names.
---
Also here is a negative "He was the son of a carpenter"
Uhhh... Indiana... Carpenters actually make good money and the "poor" part is a rather modern conception... The reason why the cup COULD be wood or Clay was because the Last Supper to my knowledge was at some bar, inn, or tavern type place meaning the cups there weren't his own.
The "Cup of a Carpenter" could have easily been made of bronze, copper, lead, or even (though unlikely) silver.
Now Jesus was likely poor... but being a Carpenter wasn't a contributing factor.
In fact I would question whether or now the Jews in that period of time were a poor people even under the Roman rule.
Post by: LordBaal on January 19, 2015, 08:11:41 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on January 19, 2015, 08:46:22 am
Post by: Bohandas on February 17, 2015, 01:20:33 am
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on February 17, 2015, 09:26:35 am
Onto a nitpick, I can't watch the Halo animated movies anymore (ok just one of them) because someone had to point out that the scaling was wrong. Now everytime I see the elite in that one film take down a 30foot tall hunter it bothers me and I can't watch it anymore .-.
Post by: Xantalos on March 06, 2015, 03:49:27 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on March 06, 2015, 03:59:18 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on March 06, 2015, 04:03:39 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on March 06, 2015, 04:28:05 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on March 06, 2015, 04:31:47 am
I'm totally calling that as the sequel though. Evilmax from an alternate dimension comes back puppeteer by eldritch abominations, primed to kill his huggly counterpart.
Post by: Sergius on April 13, 2015, 01:34:14 am
The Giant eats metal. He doesn't use the metal to grow, or repair himself, he literally seems to digest it for food, which for a robot would be energy. But metal doesn't make a very good energy source, AFAIK iron is pretty much desd in the middle of the periodic table where neither fusion nor fission would produce much or any energy. Mass to energy conversion would work on anything, not just metal, so still make no sense to eat metal.
It's pretty much just the silly notion that a creature of metal would eat metal but I don't think it works that way.
Post by: Bohandas on April 13, 2015, 01:38:09 am
Iron Giant.
The Giant eats metal. He doesn't use the metal to grow, or repair himself, he literally seems to digest it for food, which for a robot would be energy. But metal doesn't make a very good energy source, AFAIK iron is pretty much desd in the middle of the periodic table where neither fusion nor fission would produce much or any energy. Mass to energy conversion would work on anything, not just metal, so still make no sense to eat metal.
It's pretty much just the silly notion that a creature of metal would eat metal but I don't think it works that way.
It could be plausible if it was really rusty iron and he also ate aluminum. Thermite reaction and so forth.
Post by: scriver on April 13, 2015, 01:47:29 am
It works out.
Post by: Xantalos on April 13, 2015, 02:20:13 am
Iron Giant.Theory: he doesn't use it for power or anything, the Giant was a Von Neumann machine that was eating enough metal to build a second version of itself which would then do the same and etc.
The Giant eats metal. He doesn't use the metal to grow, or repair himself, he literally seems to digest it for food, which for a robot would be energy. But metal doesn't make a very good energy source, AFAIK iron is pretty much desd in the middle of the periodic table where neither fusion nor fission would produce much or any energy. Mass to energy conversion would work on anything, not just metal, so still make no sense to eat metal.
It's pretty much just the silly notion that a creature of metal would eat metal but I don't think it works that way.
The bump on the head he got screwed up his programming in that regard.
Post by: LordBaal on April 13, 2015, 07:51:36 am
The Von Neumann theorem seems to fit perfectly.
Post by: Sergius on April 13, 2015, 10:22:36 am
The Giant himself is probably not made of iron but some sort of space superalloy. But we can let that one go, it could be just "super-duper steel" which is iron+plentiful additive+unknown process.
Post by: Xantalos on April 13, 2015, 10:27:04 am
Maybe a molecular forge, but then he'd just eat whatever.
I think the bits where he eats metal like he has the munchies is because his programming got fucked up somehow when he got the head bash.
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on April 13, 2015, 10:28:44 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on April 13, 2015, 10:31:18 am
Post by: Parsely on April 13, 2015, 11:14:22 am
That can certainly be canonical, actually. They're just giant colonies of worms, so there's no real limit to their size.^^This. Their height is supposed to vary.
Post by: Bohandas on April 13, 2015, 12:13:59 pm
I'd guess he just has a really good smelter in his stomach that'd be able to smelt any metal he comes across into SUPER SPACE METAL.
Maybe a molecular forge, but then he'd just eat whatever.
He'd still need the correct elements
Post by: Cryxis, Prince of Doom on April 13, 2015, 01:45:53 pm
That can certainly be canonical, actually. They're just giant colonies of worms, so there's no real limit to their size.^^This. Their height is supposed to vary.
They aren't supposed to vary that much, they split into two separate colonies after a certain point.
*source: http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Mgalekgolo
Post by: Xantalos on April 13, 2015, 02:58:17 pm
Rather I mean a thing that disassembles and reassembles atoms into their correct configuration, but then he could just eat anything - actually I think he does, as demonstrated when he activated after having a pebble thrown down his throat. Maybe metal's just easier.I'd guess he just has a really good smelter in his stomach that'd be able to smelt any metal he comes across into SUPER SPACE METAL.
Maybe a molecular forge, but then he'd just eat whatever.
He'd still need the correct elements
Post by: Sergius on April 13, 2015, 03:36:12 pm
Still, if he's not actually building something with all that metal he's gonna get REALLY constipated eventually.
Post by: i2amroy on April 13, 2015, 05:34:57 pm
I've got to say it would be much easier to have something that could disassemble molecules into their constituent elements and then recombine them into the desired molecules than it would be to have something actually disassemble them down to individual protons and electrons and then recombine them. The first one would require you to eat the right elements, as noted. You can't make more atoms of any given substance, just use the ones you have, and thus would require you to eat iron if you needed iron, breathe oxygen if you needed oxygen (or drink water) and so on.Rather I mean a thing that disassembles and reassembles atoms into their correct configuration, but then he could just eat anything - actually I think he does, as demonstrated when he activated after having a pebble thrown down his throat. Maybe metal's just easier.I'd guess he just has a really good smelter in his stomach that'd be able to smelt any metal he comes across into SUPER SPACE METAL.He'd still need the correct elements
Maybe a molecular forge, but then he'd just eat whatever.
Post by: Sergius on April 25, 2015, 07:41:11 pm
Otherwise the movie is brilliant.
Post by: LordBaal on April 28, 2015, 03:39:37 pm
Post by: Sergius on April 28, 2015, 05:09:20 pm
Didn't seem to me that they had anything urgent to do about the village.
Post by: EPSIL0N on May 29, 2015, 08:50:05 am
Post by: LordBaal on May 29, 2015, 09:45:10 am
Then AoU comes and bam, he's back on track like nothing happened. I mean we get to see those Iron Man robots, maybe he was trying to automatize his "hero" labours as a halfarse excuse but we don't even get an explanation over that. Anyway he didn't learn all that much from what happened on Iron Man 3 and that's why crap hit the fan.
I can relate to his motivation of trying to "armour" the whole world but as pointed out he's simply careless. As for the "real" reason, dunno, he's simply careless or Jarvis needed to be connected to internet by some reason, or maybe part of Jarvis resided on the internet. It's hard to find a workplace that doesn't have internet connection, and even if the experiment on it was conducted on a "enclosed" place that didn't helped much once the AI got into a iron man robot body. I guess those robots have all kind of wireless connections that would allow him to scape in a million ways.
The second one, Hydra agents still need facebook, they are humans after all, well most of them anyway.
Post by: 94dima94 on May 29, 2015, 01:00:22 pm
The Lion King ends up teaching a message totally different from the one it was going for.
"You should have the strength to face what you did in the past, don't run away". So, when the main character does so... everyone hates him, and he almost dies.
But, wait! Everything turns out just fine... once they learn it was not his fault.
So? If you are scared by something you did... everyone will hate you for that. Unless you didn't do it; in that case, everything is fine.
Post by: Neonivek on May 29, 2015, 01:21:17 pm
As for Tony Stark... Naw he is just outright incompetent in that movie.
But that is what you get when the movie makers try to fit Ultron in 1 movie (he honestly needed 2) and make it Tony Stark who created him...
Post by: 94dima94 on May 29, 2015, 01:27:47 pm
Well Dima here is a good deflection: No one but Simba learns this. Everyone fights by him believing he did kill his father.Not really... they are by his side when he shows up, but when they learn about "his secret" they stop, and they don't do anything until he makes Scar confess HE did it...
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 29, 2015, 07:25:54 pm
I don't know if someone already told this (it's from a youtube review):That's the thing though. The real message is that everything won't be ok, unless you make your enemies kill your enemies. Thanks Disney :D
The Lion King ends up teaching a message totally different from the one it was going for.
"You should have the strength to face what you did in the past, don't run away". So, when the main character does so... everyone hates him, and he almost dies.
But, wait! Everything turns out just fine... once they learn it was not his fault.
So? If you are scared by something you did... everyone will hate you for that. Unless you didn't do it; in that case, everything is fine.
Post by: Xantalos on May 30, 2015, 12:19:56 am
He just had a backup copy of Jarvis.
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 30, 2015, 03:02:19 am
He *was* strongly implying that Shifu may have been critically injured tho.If you think that's fucked, every creature down to the smallest insect is shown as having sapience and language.
Didn't seem to me that they had anything urgent to do about the village.
...What meat is in those noodles then? And what are the carnivores for that matter eating?
Post by: 94dima94 on May 30, 2015, 03:22:07 am
The real message is that everything won't be ok, unless you make your enemies kill your enemies. Thanks Disney :DActually, now that I think about it, that is a good explanation for a LOT of Disney movies... are they really trying to teach us that, hiding the message behind the "be kind/be brave" stuff?
Post by: Sergius on May 31, 2015, 12:38:53 am
He *was* strongly implying that Shifu may have been critically injured tho.If you think that's fucked, every creature down to the smallest insect is shown as having sapience and language.
Didn't seem to me that they had anything urgent to do about the village.
...What meat is in those noodles then? And what are the carnivores for that matter eating?
None actually. WoG explicitly states every animal is vegan.
However some animals are definitely "predatory" like Tigress and in some shorts it gives them problems adjusting, which makes no sense since their default would be to be vegan either way.
Post by: Neonivek on June 06, 2015, 04:04:31 am
It felt like a hour long cat video (as in "cute") but woosh was it boring and with lots of lousy music.
I mean it was mostly boring me because the movie was like 80% montage and I feel the character development kind of entirely occurs within the montage.
Though I think what broke me is that other then the supernatural elements... the movie was somewhat realistic... Then BOOM! tons of bears together and they play up the "Isn't nature wonderful?" motif to the point where I just couldn't take it seriously.
Because yeah... being a bear is sooo easy... I mean it is like a freeken vacation... and they are all chummy with each other all the time...
It just reminded me of that Startrek movie with that culture who "Didn't use technology" and you see them with a ton of free time and just playing all the time... and I go "Yeah sure! that is exactly what a society that would need to tend crops, bake bread, weave linen, craft tools, and all that would be like"
Post by: Sergius on June 06, 2015, 01:04:44 pm
Because yeah... being a bear is sooo easy... I mean it is like a freeken vacation... and they are all chummy with each other all the time...
What? That means the Gummi Bears... lied to me. They LIED!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 06, 2015, 02:35:09 pm
It just reminded me of that Startrek movie with that culture who "Didn't use technology" and you see them with a ton of free time and just playing all the time... and I go "Yeah sure! that is exactly what a society that would need to tend crops, bake bread, weave linen, craft tools, and all that would be like"AVATAR CAT PEOPLE
90% USELESS
10% USELESS CAT
Post by: Radio Controlled on June 06, 2015, 03:34:33 pm
... Just out of curiosity, was I the only one who felt like rooting for the human side, even though I consciously knew they were the bad guys?It just reminded me of that Startrek movie with that culture who "Didn't use technology" and you see them with a ton of free time and just playing all the time... and I go "Yeah sure! that is exactly what a society that would need to tend crops, bake bread, weave linen, craft tools, and all that would be like"AVATAR CAT PEOPLE
90% USELESS
10% USELESS CAT
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 06, 2015, 04:00:00 pm
... Just out of curiosity, was I the only one who felt like rooting for the human side, even though I consciously knew they were the bad guys?No, Quaritch did nothing wrong.
Cut to the humans who begin building their infrastructure, where they begin clearing a path to the mineral deposit. They destroy a sacred tree. A tree they did not know was sacred, because the people they tasked with understanding the Naavi couldn't be asked to explain to their colleagues that killing tentacle tree is haram. Instead Jake Sully destroys the cameras of the digger, literally doing the opposite of his job by making the humans go even more in the dark. When they finally reach Hometree, after Jake Sully's inept efforts have failed, they first try clearing hometree nonlethally and only move to leveling it after the Naavi try using it as a launchpad to attack the skyships. When Jake finally gets off his arse to do something, he decides the best course of action to dealing with Quaritch is to kill him, so he assembles his great big army. Quaritch, seeing a massive fuckhueg army of blue giants, himself only fielding merchants, and not even the militant merchants like the space east india company - no we're talking space indian cornershop tier merchants, notes that Jake Sully has assembled 20,000 soldiers where before there were 2,000 and they were continually growing in number to the point where they could reach 200,000. Only then does Quaritch do the only thing that could save the human compound from being entirely overrun: Attack their tree God. Their tree God is especially notable for having assimilated human generals and scientists, giving it dangerous knowledge it could use against the human species.
Thanks to Jake Sully, after the movie ended, the human merchants will have made it home and human soldiers will have returned. Dropping tungsten rods onto their tree God from space.
Post by: Neonivek on June 06, 2015, 04:05:10 pm
You see it all the time in fiction, a lot of the time in fanfiction, and whether someone will take it as 'intentional' or not depends on their faith in your product.
Post by: Bohandas on June 06, 2015, 04:10:58 pm
They destroy a sacred tree. A tree they did not know was sacred, because the people they tasked with understanding the Naavi couldn't be asked to explain to their colleagues that killing tentacle tree is haram.
IIRC the scientists mentioned the trees being both sacred and more than they seem repeatedly and were ignored and/or laughed at
Post by: Bohandas on June 06, 2015, 04:19:38 pm
It just reminded me of that Startrek movie with that culture who "Didn't use technology" and you see them with a ton of free time and just playing all the time... and I go "Yeah sure! that is exactly what a society that would need to tend crops, bake bread, weave linen, craft tools, and all that would be like"
I don't think I've seen that one specifically. But my experience with Star Trek has been than often when they encounter a species that is happy but doesn't appear to use technology either they're powerful psychics with godlike abilities (Errand of Mercy (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Errand_of_Mercy), Who Mourns for Adonais (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Mourns_for_Adonais%3F)), or technology is using them (The Apple (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Apple_(Star_Trek)))
Post by: Radio Controlled on June 06, 2015, 04:21:02 pm
Post by: LordBaal on June 06, 2015, 04:49:37 pm
Post by: Morrigi on June 06, 2015, 06:32:16 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 06, 2015, 07:36:14 pm
Swordplay and related combat in movies is shit.Argleblarge I don't like all this pirouetting and windmilling when IRL the other dude would just fucking stab them in all that time. Awful thing is, realistic sword fighting is even more beautiful dance dance step viva la revolution ;-;
Granted, I'll give a pass for unrealistic but stylized sword fighting.
Post by: Sergius on August 06, 2015, 09:58:31 pm
So I was just watching Avengers for the 100th time, and got to the part where they find the Tesseract machine thingamabob on the roof of Stark Tower. Anyway, the thing is shielded with "pure energy" and impenetrable and all that. Not saying that this would have disabled it, but... what would have happened if they just collapsed the rooftop? It's not like the thing would just stay floating in the air pointing upwards like nothing, at least it would fall down and mess up the portal a bit. Would the force "sphere" of energy start to just bounce all over like a transparent beach ball?
Well if it keeps working at best they'd make the portal appear in a weird place that isn't open sky, like the middle of another building or on the street if it fell all the way. Probably wouldn't have helped at all to stop the invasion... but fun to think about.
Post by: Starver on August 06, 2015, 10:24:50 pm
Well if it keeps working at best they'd make the portal appear in a weird place that isn't open sky, like the middle of another building or on the street if it fell all the way. Probably wouldn't have helped at all to stop the invasion... but fun to think about.Reminds me of the whole "They built the Canary Wharf Tower ('One Canada Square') because the anomaly was up in the sky" (I think) element leading to the Doctor Who episode "Doomsday". (It seems that Pete's World had done the same thing?)
Onto the actual Avengers Assembled example, I suppose the 'power of plot' could have given a number of different conclusions to such an attempt:
- Having been 'instantiated', the energy that protects the TMT would also suspend the device in mid-air (protected from the pull of gravity).
- Gravity is not averted, but there'd be no internal inertial effects of device-and-energy-sphere suddenly stopping so it would fall (still upright?) on top of the rubble (or, if buried, now surrounded by bubble and rubble), still pointing up at the portal
- If the bubble moves (and/or rotates) the initiated portal remains where it was, because the initial breach is now being 'maintained'.
- ...or else the breach moves in relative offset (translational/angular) to the movement of the device. Its passage across anything physical (like a building or the ground) would be the same as if anything the size of the building/ground were instead passed across the face of the anomaly. Probably the wormhole damaging/boring-through the substance at its radius of reach.
- Assuming that it's not just for the convenience of the invading 'troops' that their entrance be high up in the air. Many fictional 'warp drives' are rarely, and often dangerously, operated (inward or outward, or mid-transit) inside a planetary atmosphere or strong gravitational field. The opening of the gap to the other space might require 'open air' operation, and at sufficient altitude for air pressure to be reduced beyond some practical 'spoiling' limit. (So, unlike the last point, the wormhole would destabilise if dragged downward, and even more so when encountering solid objects bigger than those it was actually designed to let pass through.)
But I've only so far seen the film the once, so you probably have me at a disadvantage.
Post by: MrWiggles on August 07, 2015, 02:37:52 am
Post by: Starver on August 07, 2015, 09:19:19 am
Although 'stationary' is relative. And technically it's in an upward-accelerating frame of reference w.r.t. local spacetime if it is 'stationary' to the mass of the Earth, plus some subtle offset due to Coriolis effects. I think we must accept the concept that upon being 'irrevocably protected', the field 'anchors' to at least the first derivative of motion of the local frame, instantaneous to activation. Which means that if you had destroyed (or removed) the whole planet Earth, without shutting off the protective field, would it have considered to rotate in space, every 24 hours, 'orbiting' around Earth's projected barycentre, in turn epicyclicly travelling around the Sun. Or in turn following the path of the Sun through the local stellar neighbourhood, turning around galactic centre... If you could be selective about which frames of reference a device such as this persistently follows, with enough control it could be an excellent way of 'travelling by not travelling'. Assuming you could calculate an appropriate combination of relative motions to observe.
(This is just one issue one needs to ask of Doc Brown, regarding the operation of his Delorean. Travel across time seems locked to local geography, but apart from all the above motions-upon-motions, there's also the likelihood of tectonic plate movements that would introduce some slight repositioning, even if it's just half of the reported "same as the rate of growth of fingernails"/whatever mid-Atlantic ridge separation rate, over the +/-30 years or so, for the North American plate, relative to... what? Oh, wait, Hollywood is the centre of the universe, so I suppose it depends on which side of various faults Hill Valley, CA, lies, w.r.t. the site of the Hollywood(Land) Sign hill itself, naturally.)
((...well, this thread is for nitpicks. Although I didn't actually have that in mind when I first started down this particular train of thought.))
Post by: BurnedToast on August 07, 2015, 03:08:22 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It's not like the game's plot was amazing prize winning material before that, but it was decent enough.... and then this glaring plot hole just completely ruins it. It's just so.... inexplicable.
Post by: Sergius on August 07, 2015, 03:21:22 pm
The Tesseract was immovable. When Tony struck it with his attack, it didnt budget at all. This was done to show that that shit was well protected, but it also tells us that that shit ain't moving from that spot. It didnt transfer Tony attack into the roof. Its locked in place.
It transferred the attack back at Tony. There's no rule that the forcefield has to exert force in the direction that it was sent, into the rooftop. Just a bubbley energy field doing bubbley energy field stuff.
Also, Tesseract was floating in the center of a machine, and the machine was either powering the Tesseract or the Tesseract powering the machine, either way it was turned off by putting the Scepter to block the energy beam thingy (the Scepter wasn't a proper key or anything, Mr. Science Guy just said it "might" be used, because it could penetrate the bubble because deus ex). The forcefield itself was centered around the Tesseract itself (the machine had uncovered parts).
The machine itself is resting on the roof. While it might have resulted in it just floating there and helping the machine float somehow because of it being anchored into the cube (the whole setup was "self-powered", no longer needing energy from the ARC, but the Tesseract wasn't doing the portaling by itself) it isn't a foregone conclusion. Plus all the Frame of Reference stuff that Starver said, but those are usually handwaved in comic physics. (there is even a superhero that travels by standing "still" relative to Earth's rotation, but somehow never actually leaves Earth even tho Earth is moving. So, somehow anchored to the center of mass or something?)
Post by: Parsely on August 07, 2015, 04:09:42 pm
Are games allowed instead of movies? Well too bad, I'm doing a game. Warning, major dishonored spoiler:I thought the whole game was fairly mediocre. There are some really impressive videos of stunts you can pull in that though.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It's not like the game's plot was amazing prize winning material before that, but it was decent enough.... and then this glaring plot hole just completely ruins it. It's just so.... inexplicable.
Post by: Sergius on August 28, 2015, 11:47:30 pm
You know that Christmas movie? Where Santa Claus is real and in the north pole and has lots of elves making toys that he somehow delivers in a single night?
Yeah, that movie. Every single one of them.
Anyway, we're supposed to suspend disbelief that magic and nice thoughts and all that make this possible, except, why is Santa always making his own toys, while every kid in the world receives something made by Mattel or whatevs? Like, in the movies they all receive custom toys and the adults know there is no freakin' way they bought them and just forgot, so the whole "believing in Santa" is pointless when you have hundreds of dollars in toys spontaneously appear in your living room for your kids. But would it be too much trouble at least to pretend that Santa just orders a lot of toys from the toy manufacturers that the kids actually receive toys from? I don't think Santa Claus just makes random objects and then stamps trademarked logos from actual companies in their toys.
TL;DR: why in every movie where Santa is real he makes his own toys and nobody suspects he's real even tho adults know THEY didn't buy them, and also they're never made by actual toy companies but elves in the north pole... uh, or something.
Yeah, it's late and I posted a lot of a jumbled mess of words but there's a point buried there somewhere.
Post by: Starver on August 29, 2015, 12:25:43 am
One sort-of-McGuffin item used in the plot is a "Computer Disc". From the start, it looks to me like a certain kind of enclosed tape spool, and it definitely looks to me like it a tape by the dénouement of the plot. But they keep calling it a disc, not a tape.
This is an age (i.e. the film setting) where computer discs are rare (and bigger! (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tiktok-africa/7865822832)... that particular one is propped up against waist-high equipment stood on the floor!). It's not like calling a Flash Memory Drive a "USB disc", where language has lagged behind technology.
It was probably an originally scripted, non-fact-checked, element that didn't get changed in the dialogue even when they ended up conjuring up actual appropriate 1960s-style props.
Ok, so it's arguable as to whether this (one) nitpick actually ruined this movie. For a start, there were certain other things that I can imagine one could complain about, but also because I happened to quite like the film, really... despite this jarring (to me) error of fact. While someone else will complain about some aspect of the vehicles, clothes, helicopters, ships or something else I never noticed, I just know.
It'll take a sequel or two (if they get around to making any) before I could possibly recognise this film as somewhat consistent with the original 1960s TV canon universe, rather than a conceptual cut'n'shut (however well done) for a new generation.
But it was a tape!
(I could also complain about the role of the "lens", but I'd be spoilering something by discussing it more. Even though it's quite obviously a Chekhov's Gun (or perhaps Bullet?), from the very moment it's introduced.)
Post by: LordBaal on August 29, 2015, 07:35:21 am
Just thought about another one.Maybe in those universes is custom of the seasons for paedophiles to send random crap to stranger kids around the world or something?
You know that Christmas movie? Where Santa Claus is real and in the north pole and has lots of elves making toys that he somehow delivers in a single night?
Yeah, that movie. Every single one of them.
Anyway, we're supposed to suspend disbelief that magic and nice thoughts and all that make this possible, except, why is Santa always making his own toys, while every kid in the world receives something made by Mattel or whatevs? Like, in the movies they all receive custom toys and the adults know there is no freakin' way they bought them and just forgot, so the whole "believing in Santa" is pointless when you have hundreds of dollars in toys spontaneously appear in your living room for your kids. But would it be too much trouble at least to pretend that Santa just orders a lot of toys from the toy manufacturers that the kids actually receive toys from? I don't think Santa Claus just makes random objects and then stamps trademarked logos from actual companies in their toys.
TL;DR: why in every movie where Santa is real he makes his own toys and nobody suspects he's real even tho adults know THEY didn't buy them, and also they're never made by actual toy companies but elves in the north pole... uh, or something.
Yeah, it's late and I posted a lot of a jumbled mess of words but there's a point buried there somewhere.
Post by: scriver on August 29, 2015, 09:38:37 am
Post by: Rolan7 on August 29, 2015, 09:43:24 am
They did an aggressive takeover, business-style. Yeah... they outsourced production to the north pole.
Post by: Sergius on August 29, 2015, 12:05:55 pm
Post by: Bohandas on August 29, 2015, 03:00:14 pm
Just thought about another one.
You know that Christmas movie? Where Santa Claus is real and in the north pole and has lots of elves making toys that he somehow delivers in a single night?
Yeah, that movie. Every single one of them.
Anyway, we're supposed to suspend disbelief that magic and nice thoughts and all that make this possible, except, why is Santa always making his own toys, while every kid in the world receives something made by Mattel or whatevs? Like, in the movies they all receive custom toys and the adults know there is no freakin' way they bought them and just forgot, so the whole "believing in Santa" is pointless when you have hundreds of dollars in toys spontaneously appear in your living room for your kids. But would it be too much trouble at least to pretend that Santa just orders a lot of toys from the toy manufacturers that the kids actually receive toys from? I don't think Santa Claus just makes random objects and then stamps trademarked logos from actual companies in their toys.
TL;DR: why in every movie where Santa is real he makes his own toys and nobody suspects he's real even tho adults know THEY didn't buy them, and also they're never made by actual toy companies but elves in the north pole... uh, or something.
Yeah, that bothers me too. Someone should make a movie that explores that mystery. Like maybe he modifies people's memories like the men in black or something.
Post by: Sergius on August 29, 2015, 03:13:02 pm
Post by: RedKing on August 29, 2015, 03:14:57 pm
Post by: Neonivek on August 29, 2015, 04:39:25 pm
Yeah, something like that, giving parents false memories that they actually went shopping for their kids. The awful implication tho would be that parents are horrible because they never buy the presents themselves, and then who are all those people crowding the malls during the holidays? It could be all robot decoys and in the end everything is a massive conspiracy.
Well does he take the money out of their account too? :P
Post by: Sergius on August 29, 2015, 04:57:41 pm
Post by: Dutrius on August 29, 2015, 05:31:35 pm
Spoiler: quite long (click to show/hide)
Post by: Akura on September 06, 2015, 06:43:55 am
Spoiler: At the end of the first Toy Story (click to show/hide)
Post by: LordBaal on September 07, 2015, 07:39:55 am
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on September 07, 2015, 10:04:01 pm
Post by: Starver on September 08, 2015, 03:04:21 pm
The lack of continuity between all four Mad Max movies, I REALLY WANT THERE TO BEA VERY ENGROSSING STORY BEHIND MAX, but it really just isn't there. The world is great and so are all the characters, but there's no really timeline or map. I guess in some sense that's what helps create the feeling, but I just want there to be MORE to fanboy over.The continuity between the first Mad Max (the one that has a sort of recognisable civilisation, albeit gone rotten after an unspecified global disaster) and the second (the one where either civilisation has gotten somewhat worse or he's moved even further away from the last vestiges of law and order) is pretty much all there if you want to see it. There's been a tipping-point and Max is forced to tip over with it, losing his anchors to the old 'real world' (his family) along the way.
Around my way, #2 (The Road Warrior) is the Max Max film, if you don't specify the numeric or subtitle element, of course, and it can be viewed as self-contained. Things are terribly, terribly wrong (at least in this particular part of the world, but then one must assume all over the place; at least enough so that nobody cares about the automotive carnage going on in these wastes) and you've got people trying to drag the world up, others trying to drag it down and this guy who is not so altruistic as the former, but he's certainly not so nihilistic as the latter. If you'd never seen #1, where he was an actual highway patrol officer who lost everything he loved, you might wonder as to why, but it doesn't hurt or hinder things.
#3 (Thunderdome) sort of carries on, in a 'not as good a sequel' way. It's no Highlander 2 (a.k.a. the one they completely ignore when developing Highlander 3, the TV series, etc) but it always seemed to be a sequel-for-sequel's sake, to me, in the typical '80s manner of jumping on (if not downright jump-starting) a bandwagon. But it still, at its core, has the same mentality. There's attempts at civilisation (separate from the Petroleum People's efforts, presumably successful if the end-narration of #2 is to be believed) at Bartertown, and the Oasis kids and at least one other 'unaligned good-to-neutral party' (the gyrocaptain, and his kid) surviving, and if it weren't for politics and other practicalities it's quite possible that Bartertown would be a virtual nirvana, compared to what's around.
#4 (Fury Road), just released, certainly is disjointed to canon, but then you can probably argue where it differs it's more a reboot than direct sequel to its 30yo predecessor.
We know from #3's closing narration that the Oasis Kids made themselves a colony, too, certainly lasting beyond the timeline for #4, and presumably whatever happened to Bartertown, Max hasn't stuck around in the same area because despite Auntie's eventual mercy he's probably not very welcome. So it's not surprising he finds himself in a new dystopian territory where there's been a fusion between the ethics and cult-of-personality of the Humungous gang from #2 with the principles of establishing a (now multi-noded) barter society from #3. (It seems perfectly attuned to the creation of a trade and combat and exploration computer game, with a massive 'sandbox' environment to roam around in. Reminds me a lot of the web-game Minethings and the flash-game Caravaneer and could probably use a GTA3-like game-engine on ... or GTA4, but I'm a bit out of date with that game series.)
Anyway, for the engrossing story behind Max, look no further than film #1. Then take the 2015 maybe-reboot with a small pinch of salt. Although I do like a number of the touches to it (underspeed camera/overspeed projection thing) that links it with the original(s), there's a lot of "awesome but impractical" to the whole local geopolitical system it depicts, as I recall. Still, as almost pure petrolpunk-porn, I'd say it works.
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on September 08, 2015, 11:39:06 pm
I like his lonesomeness, but I want to see how he got to this point. What's there is a good action story, but I feel like the journey to get to where he is in Fury Road is just as interesting.
Post by: Fniff on September 09, 2015, 12:52:31 am
It could be believable that it is the same person who is increasingly distorted by the legend built around him. For one thing, he probably looks much older then Mad Max Fury Road depicts him.
I don't mind there being no story, timeline, or map behind Mad Max. I like a lack of coherence; it builds a great atmosphere and I can fill in the details based off of that.
Post by: PTTG?? on September 10, 2015, 10:46:52 pm
The lack of continuity between all four Mad Max movies, I REALLY WANT THERE TO BEA VERY ENGROSSING STORY BEHIND MAX, but it really just isn't there. The world is great and so are all the characters, but there's no really timeline or map. I guess in some sense that's what helps create the feeling, but I just want there to be MORE to fanboy over.
That's actually not a problem. The basic assumption is that the "apocolypse" happens everywhere at the same time; this need not be true. I think the most reasonable situation is this:
In the mid-'80s, the USSR and USA get into a war in the middle east. It starts out as a proxy war but gradually ramps up to a full-on conventional war. NATO and Friends join in, including Australian forces. Max is born.
The middle eastern war continues to burn for four or five years. Furiosa is born.
Somebody sets fire to the oil wells. The light sweet crude stops flowing, and the global economy collapses. There are too many fires and too little civil order to extinguish them, and the Mjuhadien are determined to maintain the fires idealistically.
Four or five years later, massive oil deposits are discovered under the North Pole. Furiosa currently lives in a "Green Place." Fuel-starved USA and USSR both claim the oil. Neither side is remotely interested in a prolonged conventional conflict which could eat up any profit to be had from extracting the oil. Four years of massive petrochemical fires have increased temperatures substantially and introduced impressive quantities of mutagenic chemicals into the atmosphere. China steps in, claiming that the oil must be split fairly... three ways.
USA moves a fleet into the arctic. Russia puts up an armed satellite. China shoots the satellite down, claims USA did it. Russia demands USA turn over access to arctic oil. China moves a fleet into the arctic. USA attacks the chinese fleet. Russia nukes the battle. USA nukes chinese and russian ports.
Then things get heated.
In the midst of the ramp-up, Furiosa is taken into the desert by a road gang not unlike the ones depicted in later films.
Command and control break down in the northen hemisphere; after decapitating strikes, both sides become, effectively, failed states with armed nuclear bombs. Over the next 10-15 years, bombs go off throughout Eurasia and North America as broken arrows end up in warlord's hands. Max is now in his mid 20 and working as a the highways of Australia, which sat out the initial war and maintained a great deal of structure. Mad Max 1, A New Hope, takes place.
As radiation, fuel shortages, and migrating Northern Hemisphere warlords make their way south, the films record the gradual decay of Australian civilization.
Post by: Starver on September 10, 2015, 11:44:03 pm
That's actually not a problem. The basic assumption is that the "apocolypse" happens everywhere at the same time; this need not be true. I think the most reasonable situation is this:I do! I like that. It's a slightly-less-apocalyptic On The Beach (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beach_(novel)) scenario, whether or not that was part of your initial inspiration. Slower burning, less "utterly doomed anyway" (at least from the radiation, compared to the more obvious possibility of irrevocable/irrecoverable societal breakdown) but obviously with problems.
<snipping the interesting stuff, I like it...>
(And in the start of MM4, there's that mutated lizard. Never mind the problem that afflicts... Nix? Nux? That guy, and probably the rest of them. Mind you, that could have been wossisname's work, using something handily chemical/radioactive in the whole ritualistic building up of his death-driving 'boy-cult' thing.... perhaps related to whatever injured him, whilst he was still in the army... hey, I wonder if he fought alongside/against both Lord Humungous and the Petroleum People Leader from MM2... they were supposed to be in the same unit Before The Fall, as I recall, unless that was added fanfic/RPG backstory that was just conjured up out of nowhere by someone else, back in the day...)
Post by: Sergius on September 14, 2015, 07:27:54 pm
Have you noticed the "plot device" or whatever it's called when someone wants someone taken out, they cut the brakes on their car. This always 100% results in the driver losing control of the car at top speed in a winding road or even dying. It's like, people just take their cars out of their driveways and just hit the gas until they reach maximum death speed. Not a single time they brake the car to turn around a corner, or at a red light, or just generally to keep the speed down: they wait until it's Crashy Time and they're like "OMG the brakes aren't working!".
I'm pretty sure anyone cuts your brakes and the odds are that you're just going to run the first red light you find or just bump into a car in front of you or into a dumpster, than reaching a high speed road in the middle of nowhere.
Post by: Starver on September 14, 2015, 09:27:48 pm
I'm pretty sure anyone cuts your brakes and the odds are that you're just going to run the first red light you find or just bump into a car in front of you or into a dumpster, than reaching a high speed road in the middle of nowhere.I think occasionally they explicitly make it a slight puncture (or near-puncture) in the brake-line, or an initially non-severing nick in some vital cable or other. Thus they start out on their customary high-speed journey along the bendy and precipitous mountain road with nary a suspicion, only for the mechanical defect to become obvious as the stresses in the system empty the pipe of enough liquid or further fray the cable so as to convert the braking system into as much fully-realised uselessness as the plot demands1. An then there's the "a dab of acid on the steering column", or similar variants, which suddenly delinks that method of control, and I'm sure I've seen that applied to the braking system too. When it finally happens it leads either to an unavoidable doom, given the situation (e.g. being pressured by some 'random' road-hog) at the moment it occurs, or to a long enough amount of disorientation that using the perfectly workable brakes isn't the thing the shocked driver immediately does and there's a few more moments of helpless peril (before fiery death or a Hollywood escape).
Or you can rely upon the way the car is being driven. Something I saw recently involved an accident (staged, as it happens, but with this methodology as what was intended to be detected!) with a sports car being used in an uphill road-trial. After being brought to the line (pushed by hand, or on-the-clutch?), the car was now always going to be driven overwhelmingly with the accelerator, until a not-so-high-speed bend further up the course where suddenly the brakes were required to safely negotiate the bend and it ended up with the hypercompetent driver being killed. (Or, rather, that's how it looked.)
Yes, sometimes it's just "the brakes have been cut". No explanation. But would the first investigators at the scene, or the lucky near-victim always want to fully qualify their statement with the fact that precision sabotage had rendered the vehicular retardation systems vulnerable to a time-delayed failure mode? Perhaps that'd be skipped over (unless the method used is a good clue as to did it/is supposed to have done it, as a stepping-stone to the next phase in the drama!), but could still have been valid information to mentioned at some point prior to the conclusion of the subsequent court case/inquest/whatever, should summary justice or revenge not already put paid to the more official outcomes one might expect...
1 Also, the sabotage is obviously always just obvious enough to be spotted by a designated mechanically-wise individual who does detect it2, on examining the crashed or nearly-crashed vehicle, after the fact, otherwise the plot would involve a strange never-unexplained mechanical failure such as hardly actually happens in fiction, where explanations are pretty much always available, at least after enough plot-twists.
2 Whether it's the crime-scene accident investigator (or, occasionally, he/she misses it but the Columbo character happens to spot the anomaly and bring it to attention of the 'expert') or the driver him/herself once they've miraculously survived their fate and now know that they've annoyed someone...
Post by: Sergius on September 15, 2015, 12:10:51 am
Post by: Bohandas on September 15, 2015, 12:24:08 am
That's actually not a problem. The basic assumption is that the "apocolypse" happens everywhere at the same time; this need not be true. I think the most reasonable situation is this:I do! I like that. It's a slightly-less-apocalyptic On The Beach (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beach_(novel)) scenario, whether or not that was part of your initial inspiration. Slower burning, less "utterly doomed anyway" (at least from the radiation, compared to the more obvious possibility of irrevocable/irrecoverable societal breakdown) but obviously with problems.
<snipping the interesting stuff, I like it...>
Ok, on reading the synopsis of On the Beach I'd like to know if there's a reason why with that much advance warning they couldn't shore up their supply of fallout shelters and have time to move needed supplies into said shelters. This seems like the kind of thing where the damage could be minimized - not prevented but definitely minimized - with ample advance warning, which the people and nations of the book seem to have in spades. Have the protzgonists been explicitly turned away from government shelters due to lack pf room or supplies? Are lead and iodine being hoarded by profiteers?
Post by: Starver on September 15, 2015, 08:53:38 am
...Why do they always forget that handbrakes exist? I mean, seriously; it's called an emergency brake for a reason.That's assuming they (the perpetrators) haven't thought of that as well and critically damaged it.
(And is it called an Emergency Brake? Apart from at the extremes of 'defensive driving' where locking wheels and a skid of varying degrees of control is required, like a handbrake turn, I'm pretty sure it's not actually intended to be used for anything other than firmly keeping stationary a currently stationary vehicle. I'd call it a Handbrake, which is indeed ambiguous, but it's also called a Parking Brake.)
Damn, Starver, I read all that and all I could understand was "well maybe the brake malfunction wasn't immediate and didn't fail until the critical moment" but the rest just seems like a lot of trope gibberish that makes my eyes glaze over. Or maybe it's just late and I need to go to bed.I wrote it at 3:30am, myself, which could part of it. Although I don't actually see anything too bad (more than my usual). Which thus only really condemns my common rambling style.
(It was indeed "maybe it wasn't an immediate malfunction", at its core, though. The rest was, yes, rather trope-related, off the top of my head.)
Ok, on reading the synopsis of On the Beach I'd like to know if there's a reason why with that much advance warning they couldn't shore up their supply of fallout shelters and have time to move needed supplies into said shelters.It's been a while since I read it (and I can't even remember if I've seen the dramatisations, thereof), but I think there was an attitude of "we just can't do enough". Even if there's enough time to get all the crops in, that's probably a year's-worth of food (maybe less, I don't know if Australia is a net importer, and you'd want to discount those that have already started to be dosed with the leading edge of the fallout), with the added complications that it's all perishables that wouldn't last the generation (or more) of 'nuclear drought'. Non-perishable stockpiles are probably not up to a quantity that they could support any significant amounts of the population, either, and no way to enhance them in the short time they have left.
The everyday folk of Melbourne (never mind Darwin) couldn't expect survival. Whatever facilities have been/can be prepared for the 'deserving few'.
Of course, it's the tone of the book. Not a triumph-over-tragedy, or survivor-against-all-odds1. It was supposed to represent the "(if) not with a bang (then) with a wimper" argument for how nuclear war would end humanity. The actual flipside of the Mad Max canon where there's various (conflicting!) attempts to rage, rage against the dying of the light and just keep things going (or get them going again, but in some strangely weird perversion or personal fantasy). Arguably at points only just the other side of the psychological/psychopathical watershed.
Perhaps. ;)
1 As an example of this, see the pretty much 'It Does What It Says On The Tin' series of "The Survivalist" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Survivalist) ... or at least see the plot synopsis in that article... although the last 'summary' paragraph does absolutely no justice to the whole Argentinian Nazis, Friendly Russians, Space Refugees, Suboceanic Colonies, etc, that result. Safe to say, though, that the protagonist, his family and his lover live far longer than they might have ever done without a nuclear conflict. And it reads very much like a conservative polygamist gun-nut's 'Mary Sue' story, as I recall. But it was there in the library, so I read it. ;)
Post by: Sergius on September 15, 2015, 09:38:25 am
...Why do they always forget that handbrakes exist? I mean, seriously; it's called an emergency brake for a reason.That's assuming they (the perpetrators) haven't thought of that as well and critically damaged it.
(And is it called an Emergency Brake? Apart from at the extremes of 'defensive driving' where locking wheels and a skid of varying degrees of control is required, like a handbrake turn, I'm pretty sure it's not actually intended to be used for anything other than firmly keeping stationary a currently stationary vehicle. I'd call it a Handbrake, which is indeed ambiguous, but it's also called a Parking Brake.)
All those names are used interchangeably. Handbrakes use the same plates, but some cable instead of hydraulics, so I suppose it also could be cut. In the case of a non-automatic car, or one that's parked in neutral, this could hilariously result in the previously parked car rolling off a hill as soon as it's cut tho. You'd probably need some really strong cutters tho, can't just saw it off with a knife.
Handbrakes are pretty weak and only lock 2 wheels, the best way to slow down is actually to downshift gradually. Still, better than nothing I guess.
Post by: LordBaal on September 15, 2015, 09:44:14 am
I guess if you goal is to simply ruin somebody's day early you could accomplish that. If your mind is on murder you will fail, unless you have a grudge against that cat.
On the other side handbrakes are completely useless at halting an already moving car, depending on the size of the vehicle, the speed and other factors, on the best case you'll accomplish nothing, at the worst you end up without brakes and rolling around on all your axis on top of that (no that brakes would help you at that point anyway).
Your best choice is to have a manual transmission car, and slow you down by shifting gears down until you can simply bump onto something with a relative safe speed.
Post by: Sergius on September 16, 2015, 12:42:47 am
I remember once years ago that I drove all the way to work and thought the car was sluggish. Turns out I completely forgot to release the parking brake.
My current car however will barely budge if I try to move it with the handbrake on.
It's also automatic but you can limit it to 3rd, 2nd and L gears so I suppose I could downshift too. No idea what it would do with cut brakes.
Post by: Starver on September 16, 2015, 08:18:06 am
When I was learning to drive (thus normally accompanied by either instructor or a parent, to fulfil the requirements of the provisional licence) I was the totally unnecessary 'chauffeur' to my mother as we went to conduct some business from a local blacksmith1 whose shop was down a short private road. Just to get the practice in, really. Whilst down there, and mother decamped to the premises, I (on my own, but off of the public road so it was legal) practised my three-point-turn. It was a narrow lane, so it was difficult, but therefore good practice. (And, I suspect, being lined by vegetation it was less risky on the bodywork than anywhere with brick or stone walls to potentially crash into... not that I was actually in the habit of doing that, but it was the family car...)
Now returns mother, into the freshly-rotated vehicle, and as we prepare to start off out again to the main road she reminds me to let off the parking brake. Which (as you will have already realised - but I had not until that very moment) was still on from when I first parked up and disgorged my parental passenger. But it explains why (as the novice driver I was) I'd had difficulty finding the clutch's biting-point and really had to use more revs.
(Being so low a speed, I probably didn't kick up much of a stink from the brake-pads. Not so much as you'd get from holding oneself back on a steep hill, anyway, through normal braking at the end of a long drive on a hot day. I sometimes worry about that.)
Which is not to say that I haven't sometimes had (a notch or two of) handbrake on, whilst driving, in later life. At least for a few moments until I realised and corrected my error.
Spoiler: Slightly tangential ramble, skip it if you want (click to show/hide)
1 About as irrelevant a detail to this tale as you can get, but the memories are so strangely vivid...
Post by: Rolan7 on September 20, 2015, 07:55:42 pm
OH WAIT he's dead somehow. This was treated as the obvious result of strangling someone with a thick chain. Even though it was actually important that it took so long, so it's not like he crushed the guys windpipe.
Post by: Bohandas on September 20, 2015, 08:48:58 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on September 21, 2015, 12:05:02 am
Post by: Neonivek on September 21, 2015, 05:29:52 am
When you're strangling someone, it has nothing to do with trying to prevent them to breathe. You're cutting off the circulation to their brain. 13 seconds is enough to knock someone out, with anything further rapidly entering death range. He didn't die because he couldn't breathe; he died because the blood flow to the brain was cut off for so damn long.
Assuming that is what happened... and usually it isn't. Often it really is just crushing someone's windpipe so they can't breathe as opposed to getting those two major arteries at the sides. EVEN then... while it is physically possible to survive 45 minutes in that condition (in ideal circumstances) it definitely takes more then 5 minutes before any damage is actually done.
HECK! the most likely cause of death in that situation is that the person's windpipe was crushed closed... since it is pretty tough to get at those arteries without trying.
Post by: i2amroy on September 21, 2015, 06:40:55 pm
Post by: Neonivek on September 21, 2015, 06:56:03 pm
Actually anyone who knows anything about strangling knows that you should be pushing on the sides of their neck (thus cutting off those arteries) rather than pushing on the windpipe. It renders people unconscious much, much faster than trying to crush their windpipe. (Which isn't to say that someone trying to strangle someone would necessarily know that, but I wouldn't put it beyond the knowledge of a murderer).
Good thing you actually see this murder and thus you can judge for yourself what he was trying to do.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on September 26, 2015, 04:04:23 pm
Spoiler: Doctor Who, Latest episode (Season 9 episode 2) (click to show/hide)
Post by: jaked122 on September 26, 2015, 07:54:22 pm
Tell me how it isn't.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Akura on September 26, 2015, 08:07:14 pm
In Pocahontas, the white-guy protagonist does not infiltrate the natives, to become part of the tribe. He just makes out with the chief's daughter.
Post by: Neonivek on September 26, 2015, 10:11:51 pm
Are the guns for show?
Ok so this is a nitpick that has ruined more then just movies but TV shows as well... But here is my most recent horrible encounter for it.
I was watching Dr. Who dreamlands and in it several army men carry machine guns, pistols, and what have you and point it at out hero quite a bit.
Yet in spite of the fact that they have plenty of opportunity to shoot someone they never do! Seriously I'd rather enemies have HORRIBLE aim then never shoot.
I still remember in Batman the animated series where Batman stands perfectly still while shot at by a tommygun less then 30 feet away and still doesn't get a single bullet for his trouble... Yet I'd take that over "Don't move or we will shoot! uhhh ok, well uhhh stop or we will shoot! please... pretty please!"
Post by: scriver on September 27, 2015, 03:45:28 am
Are the guns for show?
Well they are prop guns...
Post by: Neonivek on September 27, 2015, 04:02:37 am
Are the guns for show?
Well they are prop guns...
:P
Believe it or not, whenever I see it I like to say "Bang... bang... bang" over and over again until the opportunity to shoot passes.
Post by: Rolan7 on September 27, 2015, 07:54:22 am
For people who haven't seen (warning, very loud) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXsQAXx_ao0
Post by: Sergius on October 04, 2015, 01:28:53 am
In that Into the Dalek episode, humankind is at (unwinnable?) war against Daleks. Their guns are completely ineffective against them, don't even slow them down.
They shoot at Daleks with said guns. Lose soldiers. Shoot them some more. Close doors behind them (the doors at least do something for a bit). Then they wait for them to shoot at them. Then close some more doors to live for 5 more minutes.
Seriously, just make spaceships that are completely made of doors and just go away, seriously. Don't even bother shooting, dude.
Post by: Culise on October 04, 2015, 12:21:26 pm
And yes, I know new-Daleks have "ELEVATE!" I haven't actually watched much nu-Who, but I have heard a few things here and there. ^_^
Post by: Sinistar on October 04, 2015, 12:46:42 pm
Can't remember any actual example, but I'm sure someone could come up with something. I mean, it is a standard practice, throwing mooks and filling screen-time with filler, but that doesn't mean it doesn't get tiresome. Sometimes.
Post by: Starver on October 04, 2015, 01:30:06 pm
Speaking of Dalek-ineffective guns, don't you sometimes hate it when in movies/series/whatever there's this situation where either good or bad guys are pitted against obviously over-powering enemy, the one that shrugs off both their best troops and strongest weapons... YET said good/bad guys INSIST on using conventional, head-on, fire-everything-you've-got tactics despite all of that?Not to excuse sloppy plot progression/universe mechanics, but:
Can't remember any actual example, but I'm sure someone could come up with something. I mean, it is a standard practice, throwing mooks and filling screen-time with filler, but that doesn't mean it doesn't get tiresome. Sometimes.
a) When the cards are down and the xenomorphs are slavering on your face, you'd throw rotten tomatoes at the things, if that was the only thing you had with reach... well, unless you're a rip-your-shirt, stand-your-ground, shout-Come-On-Then-You-Motherflipping-Extragalactic-Bioweapon!!!! type of person, in which case you stand there and let it eat/dissolve/vaporise/infect you, probably in order to save some women and children (and corrupt corporate executives) you were escorting, but also (because you'd already proven to be practically the most unkillable veteran soldier, before this) also to evoke the Worf Effect.
b) It's amazing how many invulnerable-to-plasma-weapons enemies, there are in fiction, who have wiped the deckplates with the hi-tech exoskeletal plasma-weapons orbital SWAT-squad, but end up to not have anticipated the need to protect against kinetic 'slug-thrower' weapons.
Item 'b' isn't necessarily true to any particular situation, but you can bet your bottom dollar that this particular team of SEALIONs (SEa, Air, Land, Interplanetary and Orbital, Natch) will have seen this kind of movie (as fiction within their own reality) and revert to the type 'a', above. If it works, they're Dangerously Trope Savvy, and if not then they're dangerously trope-fodder. Either way, often the Force Of Plot is strong.
Post by: Sinistar on October 04, 2015, 03:51:46 pm
But I'm talking more about how sometimes instead of displaying some tactical sense, falling back, re-grouping and re-thinking the approach, you get something completely the opposite, and from someone who's supposed to be a trained professional. But again, it would make more sense if I could present some actual example.
Post by: Bumber on October 05, 2015, 12:02:47 am
Speaking of Dr. Who.The Dalek has to stop to kill them. I question if maybe they could run circles around it instead.
In that Into the Dalek episode, humankind is at (unwinnable?) war against Daleks. Their guns are completely ineffective against them, don't even slow them down.
They shoot at Daleks with said guns. Lose soldiers. Shoot them some more. Close doors behind them (the doors at least do something for a bit). Then they wait for them to shoot at them. Then close some more doors to live for 5 more minutes.
Seriously, just make spaceships that are completely made of doors and just go away, seriously. Don't even bother shooting, dude.
Post by: Neonivek on October 05, 2015, 12:13:31 am
Speaking of Dalek-ineffective guns, don't you sometimes hate it when in movies/series/whatever there's this situation where either good or bad guys are pitted against obviously over-powering enemy, the one that shrugs off both their best troops and strongest weapons... YET said good/bad guys INSIST on using conventional, head-on, fire-everything-you've-got tactics despite all of that?
Can't remember any actual example, but I'm sure someone could come up with something. I mean, it is a standard practice, throwing mooks and filling screen-time with filler, but that doesn't mean it doesn't get tiresome. Sometimes.
Last Remnant had exactly this... except it was actually an awesome scene.
Especially since:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Culise on October 05, 2015, 10:08:43 am
Oh, I don't mind the last stand type of things. And I would agree with both a and b point presented, they are quite plausible.
But I'm talking more about how sometimes instead of displaying some tactical sense, falling back, re-grouping and re-thinking the approach, you get something completely the opposite, and from someone who's supposed to be a trained professional. But again, it would make more sense if I could present some actual example.
Your passing comment just got me lost for the last hour on TV Tropes (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HollywoodTactics), looking for stuff to back you up. The more gratuitous examples of that tend to bother me a bit, as well. :P
Post by: Akura on October 05, 2015, 10:14:37 am
Can't remember any actual example, but I'm sure someone could come up with something.
If you want to go with a horrid piece of crap that I somehow managed to enjoy, Battlefield Earth had that. Then again, the sheer improbability of such weapons working after 1000 years in a not-environmentally-controlled bunker, weapons that include Harriers and nuclear bombs, means you probably shouldn't think about it.
Post by: LordBaal on October 05, 2015, 11:39:47 am
One advice to future humans, ranged weapons where invented for a very good and valid reason. No amount of training and fancy gadget multiple swords can compensate for the use of ranged weapons when they apply. For example against gigantic blind monsters you can see and score good shoots coming from a mile away.
And for the mysterious aliens, next time you want to exterminate another race don't do it like the fuckwit lazy way of simply releasing wild animals on their planets. Weapons are far more effective. And if you choose the stupid way of animal bio-weapons designed with bioengineering, don't be so cheap to not include a at least a pair of decent photon receptors in there, I bet it wouldn't add up so much in the bill.
Post by: Neonivek on October 05, 2015, 11:42:03 am
Post by: LordBaal on October 05, 2015, 12:05:21 pm
Well the Dune Novels had an excuse. personal forcefield technology outstripped weapon technology. So now everyone was back to using swords.In never quite figured out why then people didn't use lasers from afar to blow people up, with all those forcefield blowing up in thermonuclear fire when in contact with lasers. Or was it only for vehicles force fields?
Post by: Neonivek on October 05, 2015, 12:07:58 pm
Well the Dune Novels had an excuse. personal forcefield technology outstripped weapon technology. So now everyone was back to using swords.In never quite figured out why then people didn't use lasers from afar to blow people up, with all those forcefield blowing up in thermonuclear fire when in contact with lasers. Or was it only for vehicles force fields?
Because the way it works is if you have a forcefield, and they have a forcefield... There is a feedback loop that keeps gathering in power and intensity that it CAN lead to exactly that.
Those lasers would have to be remote.
Post by: LordBaal on October 05, 2015, 12:12:01 pm
Oh right! My dune-fu is really rusty. But remote lasers seems like an option, just equip them on a robo....afadhfdhaghh...Well the Dune Novels had an excuse. personal forcefield technology outstripped weapon technology. So now everyone was back to using swords.In never quite figured out why then people didn't use lasers from afar to blow people up, with all those forcefield blowing up in thermonuclear fire when in contact with lasers. Or was it only for vehicles force fields?
Because the way it works is if you have a forcefield, and they have a forcefield... There is a feedback loop that keeps gathering in power and intensity that it CAN lead to exactly that.
Those lasers would have to be remote.
Post by: Neonivek on October 05, 2015, 12:17:47 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on October 05, 2015, 02:57:59 pm
Post by: Starver on October 05, 2015, 04:25:20 pm
After Earth... the mind boggling stupidity of overcomplicated solutions piling all over.You had me at "After Earth". So many flaws with that movie, as I recall. Exactly what the flaws were, I have forgotten. As a necessary part of trying to forget After Earth in its entirety.
Post by: Arx on October 06, 2015, 04:11:51 am
Well the Dune Novels had an excuse. personal forcefield technology outstripped weapon technology. So now everyone was back to using swords.In never quite figured out why then people didn't use lasers from afar to blow people up, with all those forcefield blowing up in thermonuclear fire when in contact with lasers. Or was it only for vehicles force fields?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: PTTG?? on October 06, 2015, 03:19:07 pm
Still, trading one dude with a laser for an entire enemy division is good tactics.
Post by: Vattic on October 06, 2015, 03:33:40 pm
In never quite figured out why then people didn't use lasers from afar to blow people up, with all those forcefield blowing up in thermonuclear fire when in contact with lasers. Or was it only for vehicles force fields?Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on October 06, 2015, 03:56:22 pm
The laser AND the shield blows up.
Still, trading one dude with a laser for an entire enemy division is good tactics.
Sure you just have to be suicidal.
Though part of me questions how much of an enemy division could really be blown up. Given that an explosion would be blocked by the shields as well.
Post by: Starver on October 06, 2015, 05:46:56 pm
One: Says a technically-trained person, "Wind velocity is twenty-one point forty-one metres per second" (or very similar). I can't believe that any technically-trained person (in NASA, no less) would specify decimals in such a manner. And, if they do, I hope they're ashamed of themselves.
Two: The trajectories of the crew transitioning from the Hermes central corridor to the 'spoke' corridor down to the habitat appeared to consistently exhibit a curve. Treating it as a non-rotating frame of reference, the angled push-off of the central corridor would be straight (as a diagonal), and then upon entering the 'down-spoke' you contact the tube-wall before you start going straight down it. Treating it as a rotating frame of reference, you'd have to account for the Coriolis forces and aim ahead (to the turn-wise wall) and still wait until you contacted it before you'd curve in that direction. In neither case would you execute a graceful dive. (And I'd be doubtful about going in head-first, given you need to make sure you quickly tuck in to go feet-first down the ladder, however stylishly it seems they get to slid down to the apparently 1G end-node. You don't want to risk not getting a hold and being flung out head-first/downwards, by being propelled by the withershins edge of the spoke-tube. However, they've had months and months and months to get their space-legs. Even if they couldn't defy the laws of momentum.)
I'll avoid the spoilerish nitpicks, for now.
Post by: PTTG?? on October 06, 2015, 11:48:52 pm
The laser AND the shield blows up.
Still, trading one dude with a laser for an entire enemy division is good tactics.
Sure you just have to be suicidal.
Though part of me questions how much of an enemy division could really be blown up. Given that an explosion would be blocked by the shields as well.
You are familiar with the Fremen, yes? The only reason they'd hesitate would be to dehydrate themselves so they don't inadvertently vaporize useful water.
As for the shields, they're transparent. Even if they protected against the blast wave, the heat alone would destroy quite a large enemy force.
Post by: scriver on October 07, 2015, 12:34:47 am
One: Says a technically-trained person, "Wind velocity is twenty-one point forty-one metres per second" (or very similar). I can't believe that any technically-trained person (in NASA, no less) would specify decimals in such a manner. And, if they do, I hope they're ashamed of themselves.
How should a technical person have put it?
Post by: i2amroy on October 07, 2015, 12:49:20 am
Post by: Arx on October 07, 2015, 01:07:47 am
In never quite figured out why then people didn't use lasers from afar to blow people up, with all those forcefield blowing up in thermonuclear fire when in contact with lasers. Or was it only for vehicles force fields?Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
The laser AND the shield blows up.
Still, trading one dude with a laser for an entire enemy division is good tactics.
Sure you just have to be suicidal.
Though part of me questions how much of an enemy division could really be blown up. Given that an explosion would be blocked by the shields as well.
Spoiler: Actual fairly major spoilers for later Dune books (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on October 07, 2015, 03:48:45 am
Twenty-one point four-one I would assume? Twenty-one point forty-one sounds kinda strange to me.Indeed. It's the way I'd expect (or at least, accept) a non-technical actor to say a technical character's dialogue, but even then I've got to question their early-years mathematics education if they ever got into that habit.
Say there's two readings: "[zero] point seven" and "[zero] point fourteen". Quick, which is largest? And what's the factor between them?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also, since I wrote my original post, I've half a memory that the original quote was more like "coming in at(/from?) 21.41 degrees", instead. It is part of the first few minutes of the movie, so I had a long time to dwell on my main nitpick, whilst forgetting the precise context.
However, this would (as also with the velocity version, but that to a lesser degree) raise the question about undue accuracy with inherently inaccurate details: measured from a distance (satellite images?), at a distance (it's still incoming, with plenty of arguably-inaccurate local geology more than capable of changing nature of the eddies over the base). That's a precision of less than three parts in a hundred thousand across the whole horizontal circle. And if she was militarily trained, as I think the character concerned was, "zero two one" or rounded/truncated to "zero two zero"/"zero two" would have come more naturally. More than enough precision for any purpose, to just the degree, and possibly even to five/ten-degrees of rounding. Especially noting the thought processes regarding the possibly precision around a circle, later on in the film for the <spoiler element> part of the plot...)
..but I'm only obsessing over this because I like the whole film, and because this is a nitpick that can be safely aired without spoiling a plot-point by spilling too many details.
(Unlike the thing-under-the-flag. At the edge of a crater? A potentially scientifically interesting point, where it might also naturally become uncovered under wind action? And when, amazingly, an unmarked something in the middle of a plain, can easily be found. Ok, so maybe it makes it more likely that the flag won't be buried, but at the risk that it becomes uprooted; unless both it and the thing is also drilled somewhat into crater-edge bedrock. Someone who has read the book might know more than the film let on. I've heard there's differences, though.)
Post by: Bohandas on October 07, 2015, 07:44:09 pm
Post by: Sergius on October 11, 2015, 09:00:18 pm
It's not as noticeable in movies because, well, main character usually only survive two or three more encounters than cannon fodder since movies are much shorter. Like, why everyone dies but Han Solo? Well, he was only like in 3 deadly situations, not 100. But then a Companion is constantly in danger and the bad guys always miss or merely CHOOSE not to kill him/her (without even knowing who he is). But that guy in the grocery store? Dead. Woman reading newspaper? Dead. Every hostage in the bank? Terrorists decide to kill 99 and only keep the Support Character at random as a hostage, who is the same person that survived fifty similar situations.
Like I said, if nobody dies or people die only rarely or if they're stupid, well, it's easier to stomach than aliens EXTERMINATE EVERYONE ON SIGHT but then the support character is standing in the last remaining untouched 2 foot-diameter disc of floor AGAIN.
I ramble because I'm a bit tired, heh...
Post by: Noyemi K on October 11, 2015, 09:16:02 pm
"Oh god he's sweeping his friend with a loaded revolver! AND his finger's inside the trigger guard!! This asshole's trained?!" -boom, suspension of disbelief broken.
Also, movies with hackers. Can't watch a single one because they are so ridiculous, it's like hollywood thinks computers are magical boxes that do arcane things when you type cheat codes into them.
Post by: PTTG?? on October 11, 2015, 10:30:38 pm
Taken with a grain of salt since, hey, when I play tabletop games I use those exact same rules for my goons/PCs.
Post by: Neonivek on October 11, 2015, 10:31:28 pm
On the guns thing. Hero shoots a goon in, say, the upper arm? That guy is dead before he hits the floor. Hero gets shot in the upper chest? He can muscle through for an hour or so until he gets some gauze put over in the back of an ambulance at the end of the movie.
Taken with a grain of salt since, hey, when I play tabletop games I use those exact same rules for my goons/PCs.
But in all fairness in tabletop it is just because you want the goons freeken out of the way.
Post by: Rolan7 on October 11, 2015, 10:55:23 pm
Usually it's mountains of firearms use nitpicks in popular films. I can't watch Tarantino movies because of my fundamental disagreement with gun kata.At least the gun part kinda spawned a major subplot in Pulp Fiction.
"Oh god he's sweeping his friend with a loaded revolver! AND his finger's inside the trigger guard!! This asshole's trained?!" -boom, suspension of disbelief broken.
Also, movies with hackers. Can't watch a single one because they are so ridiculous, it's like hollywood thinks computers are magical boxes that do arcane things when you type cheat codes into them.
Movie hacking though... Yeah it's like watching clowns. I'm so used to it and it's so ridiculous that I kinda just enjoy it at this point.
Like that CSI or whatever where the entire government is getting hacked, and Gibbs finds the servers doing it, but they're running out of time so he shoots all the monitors and it works. Also I think that episode had a gamer who was at the top of a dozen MMORPGs (who of course was a cute chick who flirted with the team geek).
Of course that episode was so absurdly over the top that it *had* to be trying to make people laugh. I'm sure even the average viewer understood that it was being kinda silly.
Post by: Sergius on October 11, 2015, 11:30:49 pm
Post by: scriver on October 11, 2015, 11:52:11 pm
Post by: Neonivek on October 11, 2015, 11:52:49 pm
Post by: Bumber on October 12, 2015, 07:28:41 am
Psh! And how does that exclude the videogame AND movie where someone manages to computer hack someone's brain?Lawnmower Man's in your head now.
Post by: Neonivek on October 12, 2015, 07:35:49 am
Psh! And how does that exclude the videogame AND movie where someone manages to computer hack someone's brain?Lawnmower Man's in your head now.
Well not quite what I meant. Especially since Lawmowerman is about them sort of developing a technology-brain interface.
I mean one where someone hacks this woman's brain by hacking into her brain wave monitor.
Post by: andrea on October 12, 2015, 07:42:32 am
Post by: Sergius on October 12, 2015, 08:45:32 am
Post by: Starver on October 12, 2015, 03:52:02 pm
Also, movies with hackers. Can't watch a single one because they are so ridiculous, it's like hollywood thinks computers are magical boxes that do arcane things when you type cheat codes into them.idspispod
I love it (in an ironic fashion, that is) when you can recognise the 'encrypted code' someone is hacking as some random data dump from some obviously-not-encrypted-code source.
A favourite back in the '80s seemed to be using a rapidly-scrolling "DEBUG COMMAND.COM" (or similar). These days it seems it tends to be a javalike (or, more generally, across the whole C-family, though I've not seen Python yet) code listing, when they haven't actually put the effort into putting together something else, whether it appears at through a bog standard command/shell prompt in a mundane a 'realistic' hacker situation or in a weird 'holographic floating window' for ones using a futuretech-style interface.
That's (usually) when it's not intended to be 'real' data. As in the random bitplane of seeming-nonsense that the hacker-system projects in the air in front of the puzzled co-protagonists, before one of them is struck by inspiration and makes some control-gestures to add depth-information and rotates the whole horizontally to show that it's a topological map.
Anyway, a note to future film critics: Should I ever 'code noise' to a film, that isn't actually intended to be so deconstructed on-screen, my 'pseudoencryption' may well be in some permutation of Perl. (As will any filmic-pseudocode. Which will be actual code. Stripped of most comments and with unintuitive line-feeds and whitespace. And if I can make it actually be an intended easter-egg for those who can frame-grab, I will.)
Code: [Select]
#!/bin/perl/if/this/bit/isn't/a/giveaway(but|seriously|change|this|bit|as|required)
$eat=qq|7S/K,dEy"geDbqzw-MC[ P#)'aT=N2ju1ktWvsB\ncIG(Ur:xh0.fi6AnO3]9ml84p5o7hA|
.qq|vSk3xGvk[S#c\nSm3ywxpxEwbtckSKw=cWWe"W,Myj]z//W/,Bryj]z//W/,Bx8Gk3cW,,,zWzW|
.qq|zBgNqEjS4xySuw3jxiwk[x[G=t3#jMx0Gb(kxiGk=[xGxjwb]E3xSb3xn3=Gvj3xk[3mxG#3xjS|
.qq|x#w8w=vESvj4xwk(jxEwt3x[SEEmiSS8xk[wbtjx=SyKvk3#jxG#3xyG]w=GExnS 3jxk[Gkx8S|
.qq|xG#=Gb3xk[wb]jxi[3bxmSvxkmK3x=[3Gkx=S83jxwbkSxk[3yMNh5AvSk3gNw8jKwjKS8NNTxE|
.qq|Su3xwkx'wbxGbxw#Sbw=x-Gj[wSb4xk[GkxwjUxi[3bxmSvx=Gbx#3=S]bwj3xk[3x(3b=#mKk3|
.qq|8x=S83(xjSy3Sb3xwjx[G=twb]xGjxjSy3x#Gb8Syx8GkGx8vyKx-#SyxjSy3xSnuwSvjEmfbSk|
.qq|f3b=#mKk38f=S83xjSv#=3MNNqx-GuSv#wk3xnG=txwbxk[3x(dCjxj33y38xkSxn3xvjwb]xGx|
.qq|#GKw8Emfj=#SEEwb]x9Ol2)ax0D..q\nOM0D.9x'S#xjwywEG#UMxxI[3j3x8Gmjxwkxj33yjxw|
.qq|kxk3b8jxkSxn3xGxsGuGEwt3x'S#4xyS#3x]3b3#GEEm4xG=#Sjjxk[3xi[SE3x0f-GywEm4xk[|
.qq|Sv][xT(u3xbSkxj33bx:mk[Sbxm3kUx=S83xEwjkwb]4xi[3bxk[3mx[Gu3b(kxG=kvGEEmxKvk|
.qq|xk[3x3--S#kxwbkSxKvkkwb]xkS]3k[3#xjSy3k[wb]x3Ej34xi[3k[3#xwkxGKK3G#jxGkxk[#|
.qq|Sv][xGxnS]xjkGb8G#8x=SyyGb85j[3EExK#SyKkxwbxGxyvb8Gb3xGx(#3GEwjkw=(x[G=t3#x|
.qq|jwkvGkwSbxS#xwbxGxi3w#8x([SES]#GK[w=x-ESGkwb]xiwb8Si(x-S#xSb3jxvjwb]xGx-vkv|
.qq|#3k3=[fjkmE3xwbk3#-G=3MNNI[Gk(jx'vjvGEEmUxi[3bxwk(jxbSkxwbk3b838xkSxhwgn3h5|
.qq|wgx(#3GE(x8GkGMxxqjxwbxk[3x#Gb8SyxnwkKEGb3xS-xj33ywb]fbSbj3bj3xk[Gkxk[3x[G=|
.qq|t3#fjmjk3yxK#Ss3=kjxwbxk[3xGw#xwbx-#SbkxS-xk[3xKv66E38x=SfK#SkG]Sbwjkj4xn3-|
.qq|S#3xSb3xS-xk[3yxwjxjk#v=txnmxwbjKw#GkwSbxGb8xyGt3jxjSy3x=Sbk#SEf]3jkv#3jxkS|
.qq|xG88x83Kk[fwb-S#yGkwSbxGb8x#SkGk3jxk[3xi[SE3x[S#w6SbkGEEmxkSxj[Sixk[Gkxwk(j|
.qq|xGxkSKSES]w=GExyGKMNNqbmiGm4xGxbSk3xkSx-vkv#3x-wEyx=#wkw=jPxo[SvE8xTx3u3#x(|
.qq|=S83xbSwj3(xkSxGx-wEy4xk[Gkxwjb(kxG=kvGEEmxwbk3b838xkSxn3xjSx83=Sbjk#v=k38x|
.qq|Sbfj=#33b4xymx(Kj3v8S3b=#mKkwSb(xyGmxi3EExn3xwbxjSy3xK3#yvkGkwSbxS-x:3#EMxx|
.qq|'qjxiwEExGbmx-wEyw=fKj3v8S=S83Mxx1[w=[xiwEExn3xhwgG=kvGEh5wgx=S83Mxok#wKK38|
.qq|xS-xySjkx=Syy3bkjxGb8xiwk[xvbwbkvwkwu3xEwb3f-338jxGb8xi[wk3jKG=3Mxxqb8xw-xT|
.qq|x=GbxyGt3xwkxG=kvGEEmxn3xGbxwbk3b838x3Gjk3#f3]]x-S#xk[Sj3xi[Sx=Gbx-#Gy3f]#G|
.qq|n4xTxiwEEMU|;$wheat=substr $eat,0,1,'';$eat=~s/(^[^$wheat]*?)$wheat//;@never
=split('',$1);for(0..$#never){$soaked{$never[$_]}=$never[$#never-$_]}while($eat)
{print $soaked{substr$eat,0,1,""}}
Post by: strawberry-wine on October 13, 2015, 09:24:33 am
Post by: Starver on October 13, 2015, 10:38:13 am
Chappie (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1823672/) has the best hacker scenes... for example this action-packed scene (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZwDlkZsM5k) of the main character chugging red bull and 'activating' an AI program. (And no, he doesn't run any tests on the 'activated' CONCIOUSNESS.DAT)I loved the mix of *nix and DOS terminal concepts in the interfaces. (Including ANSII windowing for some interfaces, which some think is a dying art, outside of certain Linux bare-bones installs!) It looked suitably kludged together, perhaps various FSs and NFSs being part of the development network, just as I'd expect a tech development company in such an on-the-edge-of-anarchy environment, and with the main guy's apparent level of geek-savant.
But that was just from the one viewing of the film, so there were probably some inexplicable errors that I missed whilst my attention wasn't on the right bit of the screen to see them.
I did notice, however, that there was also a "Windows logon" screensaver (XP version of c:\windows\system32\logon.scr, if I'm not mistaken; it certainly wasn't the equivalent version for Win2K, and I don't think that look lasted much later than XP, either) on a prominent monitor on the way to the reprogram-key safe cage. Given that it's a 20-minutes-into-the-future setting, and that I still use XP (it's stable enough on the hardware I use it with, for the purpose I use it... and it isn't even my oldest system that I'm not planning on upgrading any time soon), it made me grin.
There's two explanations come to mind about why the .DAT wasn't 'tested' (before the 'live test'). The film suggests that the code (like human consciousness... very like it, in fact) is somehow just not comprehensible as straight bits and bytes that can not (at least after use) be so easily peeked and poked... perhaps becoming quantum states in whatever CPU/memory system is now in use in such machinery.
The more mundane reason might be that it's a seed-egg self-modifying program that needs to decompress and 'fill' a system with environmental interaction (and with the internal architecture of the hardware that connects it to the environment) to properly develop (at which point, it's not so simple to thus copy; or copy over...). The testing of the expanded CONSCIOUSNESS.DAT (unlike far simpler .DATs, such the usual OS for the policebots, and that other far simpler one also seen being uploaded across the board) would require a complex virtual 'chappie' simulator within a complex virtual 'environment', with a complexity beyond that of the (presumably sophisticated) chappie-bot and the real-world environment it would be exploring. (See Gödel's incompleteness theorems, the Halting Problem, etc.) Similarly, his in-house gadgetbot was of far too low a sophistication to support the computational requirements required for the target level of AI.
Although, despite saying that there was no testing (and, of course, the originally-planned illicit implementation was scuppered by outside forces... we have no idea what initial tests might have happened without their intervention and rush to go straight to the last step), there were some 'easy tests' that were being done, perhaps trying to block more trivial issues such as the emergence of a Dining Philosopher's Problem with distinct subsystems operating to mutually block each other for a limited number of inputs and internal states that can be more easily determined. Either that or some more mundane form of compiler dependency/module-viability checking, but it seemed to suggest more than just this, behind its intentionally obfuscated technobabble on-screen treatment.
...but do stop me if you think I'm taking this too seriously. ;)
Post by: Rolan7 on October 13, 2015, 11:24:44 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY2JzfLU8Ds
Honorable mentions to Jurassic Park's "Unix" scene, and Swordfish.
Post by: Sergius on October 13, 2015, 05:40:58 pm
Post by: Bohandas on October 18, 2015, 01:13:49 pm
Post by: Sergius on October 18, 2015, 02:52:25 pm
It's almost as bad when these same characters are killed within the first 5 minutes of the sequel. GI Joe did this.
Post by: Neonivek on October 18, 2015, 04:40:52 pm
Of course, those CSI scenes aren't even close to the best hacking scene evar:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY2JzfLU8Ds
Honorable mentions to Jurassic Park's "Unix" scene, and Swordfish.
You would THINK so... But you have no idea how low CSI can go.
Post by: Starver on October 18, 2015, 05:00:20 pm
I hate when sequels have a "prologue" like "lol all the heroes in the first movie died off-camera". A bad movie either way, Kickboxer did it and it was really stupid. "Hey your brother won the first tournament but the bad guy waited for him in the alley and shot him right after the fight. Also you have to fight him because honor."Worf effect? (Did they? Haven't seen that particular sequel. Mind you, I'm still rooted in the era of the Red Shadows and Baron Ironblood vs. Action Force.)
It's almost as bad when these same characters are killed within the first 5 minutes of the sequel. GI Joe did this.
Post by: LordBaal on October 18, 2015, 07:34:16 pm
In Event Horizon the first creepy hallucination that happens seems to happen quite independently of the haunted spaceship that's responsible for the majority of the creepy stuff that goes on in the film. WTF is up with that.Well chaos and the warp are indeed arcane.
Post by: Reelya on October 18, 2015, 09:40:00 pm
I hate when sequels have a "prologue" like "lol all the heroes in the first movie died off-camera". A bad movie either way, Kickboxer did it and it was really stupid. "Hey your brother won the first tournament but the bad guy waited for him in the alley and shot him right after the fight. Also you have to fight him because honor."
It's almost as bad when these same characters are killed within the first 5 minutes of the sequel. GI Joe did this.
In those cases they're a "sequel" in name only. There could be a number of reasons for this. Maybe they bought an already-completed unrelated script, and wanted to re-use an existing franchise to help market it. Or the original actors refused to do a sequel. Basically it's always a cash-in when this happens.
Post by: Neonivek on October 18, 2015, 09:54:08 pm
But any movie where either
A) Someone offers someone elses soul
or
B) A Demon attempts to take the soul of a baby
I know it is silly of me to say this... But
A) You CANNOT give someone elses soul... I don't care what condition you put. MAYBE if you do a ritual that transfers it over... but the idea that you can just be good and innocent until the devil pops up and sucks out your soul... Is just completely backwards to me.
B) Really? A demon is going to take the soul of something completely innocent and incorruptible via demon powers?
Heck I still remember Phantasmagoria where a baby's ghost was still bound to the mansion via the demon influence... Yet even it couldn't be corrupted and just became... well... the most scary ghost in the entire game (but for different reasons).
Post by: Reelya on October 18, 2015, 10:10:28 pm
It was a 1980's disney kids/horror TV movie, called Mr. Boogedy (had to look this up: Apparently they're pretty good as that sort of thing goes, since they have high surprisngly high ratings on imdb, 7.7 for the first film and 7.5 for the sequel).
It was the typical, "kids see monsters, parents don't believe them" type thing, with the parents going "monsters? seriously? there's no such thing as monsters, kids, you're lying/crazy/making things up!". But in the second half of the movie the parents fully see the monsters and help seal them in the portal to hell in the basement of the house. So far, that's just a regular kid's movie, and makes sense in itself.
But then they made a sequel. And in the sequel, for some reason the family didn't move out of the house with the portal to hell in it, but that's not my wtf.
In the sequel, the monsters come back and are seen by the kids. The kids then tell their parents "oh shit, those exact same monsters we fought are back!". But somehow the parents did a complete memory reset. It's like Stepford Wives level. But now they're going "monsters? seriously? we sealed the monsters in the seventh level of hell, kids, you're lying/crazy/making things up!". According to wikipedia, some fortune teller also tries to tell the parents that there's danger but they laugh it off, and then to "prove" there are no monsters the parents conduct some occult ritual, which actually unleashes the monsters back out of the portal they sealed in the first movie. So, yeah, the parents had an excuse to be skeptical in the first movie, but the second movie just turns them into morons.
Post by: Bohandas on October 18, 2015, 10:18:36 pm
In Event Horizon the first creepy hallucination that happens seems to happen quite independently of the haunted spaceship that's responsible for the majority of the creepy stuff that goes on in the film. WTF is up with that.Well chaos and the warp are indeed arcane.
They weren't to the dang thing yet though
Also, It's odd. I've noted that people remark that Event Horizon is a spiritual prequel to Warhammer 40 K, but I'm not sure if I've ever heard anyone say the same obvious thing about Hellraiser (slaanesh) or The Thing From Another World (Orks)
Post by: Reelya on October 18, 2015, 10:23:10 pm
Cliver Barker's stuff is much more clearly influential on the series. As is the Alien franchise.
Post by: Bohandas on October 18, 2015, 10:32:38 pm
Post by: Reelya on October 18, 2015, 10:36:53 pm
Quote
From Beyond centers on a pair of scientists attempting to stimulate the pineal gland with a device called The Resonator. An unforeseen result of their experiments is the ability to perceive creatures from another dimension that proceed to drag the head scientist into their world, returning him as a grotesque shape-changing monster that preys upon the others at the laboratory.
Hellraiser came out 1 month before the launch of Warhammer 40k. While it could have been an influence on the first edition, it's unlikely. Definitely had an influence on fleshing things out as they went along however.
Post by: Starver on October 19, 2015, 07:46:56 am
The link to WH40k seems pretty weak for Event Horizon from my point of view. "nasty shit waiting for us in another dimension" is pretty standard fare.Warhammer 40K started with this particular schtick somewhere between 1987 and 1993 (as the first edition got compiled), IIRC. Event Horizon was 1997. So spiritual predecessor, but certainly not temporal.
Cliver Barker's stuff is much more clearly influential on the series. As is the Alien franchise.
(Hellraiser was 1987 [ninjaed, with more detail!], The Thing From Another World was 1951. But, even there, I tend to agree with a 'common originating meme' and/or 'converging evolution', rather than a direct link. OTOH, non-40K Terminators doubtless inspired the 40K Necron race (while 40K Terminators were at least a distant great-uncle of Halo Spartans) and Manga (especially that featuring Gundam-like mecha) probably inspired the Tau. The original Gene-Stealers were Aliens (but the Tyrranids as a whole predated at least the filmic Starship Troopers, even if not the original 1959 book, which might have also inspired aspects of Space Marine tech). And of course a whole swathe of 40K races are future-versions of the original Warhammer races which are basically direct descendants from Tolkien, with the benefit of many decades of intervening derivative fiction and popularisation of the appropriate concepts in the appropriate melting-pots made of adolescent human brain. Mmmm... adolescent human brain.... <droool>)
Post by: i2amroy on October 19, 2015, 12:19:13 pm
B) A Demon attempts to take the soul of a babyConsidering that generally demons (at least in the stuff I watch/read) take souls by means of arcane contracts, it seems like the premier age for soul snatching would be the early toddler age, since, AFAIK, demons aren't bound by the law that says that contracts that minors sign are invalid. All they'd need to do would be to write up a piece of paper that said "I do hereby give my soul to X demon irrevocably and for all time in exchange for absolutely nothing", then hand it to a young child and wait till they scribble in the appropriate section (ideally they would make it so crayon only stuck in the appropriate box). Then just snap up their soul and be on your way.
Of course they wouldn't be the most satisfying soul suckings, but they would certainly be effective! :P
Post by: LordBaal on October 19, 2015, 12:53:20 pm
Post by: Culise on October 19, 2015, 01:04:26 pm
Or simply offer them candy or something for it.Or cake.
Spoiler: Puella Magi Madoka Magica spoilers (click to show/hide)
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on October 19, 2015, 01:45:28 pm
Post by: i2amroy on October 19, 2015, 01:54:01 pm
Yes! So much win! :POr simply offer them candy or something for it.Or cake.Spoiler: Puella Magi Madoka Magica spoilers (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on October 19, 2015, 11:20:49 pm
B) A Demon attempts to take the soul of a babyConsidering that generally demons (at least in the stuff I watch/read) take souls by means of arcane contracts, it seems like the premier age for soul snatching would be the early toddler age, since, AFAIK, demons aren't bound by the law that says that contracts that minors sign are invalid. All they'd need to do would be to write up a piece of paper that said "I do hereby give my soul to X demon irrevocably and for all time in exchange for absolutely nothing", then hand it to a young child and wait till they scribble in the appropriate section (ideally they would make it so crayon only stuck in the appropriate box). Then just snap up their soul and be on your way.
Of course they wouldn't be the most satisfying soul suckings, but they would certainly be effective! :P
A demon still can't take a pure soul... Regardless of what the contract says.
At least in my mind. The contracts are a form of corruption requiring the person to give into greed or avarice.
A Toddler is just giving into "not knowing any better"
Post by: Sergius on October 20, 2015, 09:33:50 am
Anyway I never watched another episode of this stupid show.
Post by: DeKaFu on October 20, 2015, 09:50:11 am
I was actually just having a discussion the other day about whether it would be demon-legal to include selling your soul as a requirement to completing your university degree. Sucks, but what can you do?
I wish I could remember the context for that discussion.
Post by: LordBaal on October 20, 2015, 10:15:28 am
Related... there was this show, something about a soul collector (I think it was named The Collector or something really imaginative like that). The premise was, some people had made deals with the devil but then were avoiding paying or something (by going to hell) so this guy went and collected them. There was this woman, the details of her deal I can't bother to remember, but because she wouldn't pay, some OTHER unrelated dude couldn't stop raping or abusing his underage daughter or whatever. The idea was very troublesome to me (in addition to the child abuse part obviously) because this guy had done no kind of deal yet his "free will" was being denied by third parties, which is not how this is supposed to work (otherwise why make deals? just make everyone rape everyone!).The Collector (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Collector_%28TV_series%29) indeed.
Anyway I never watched another episode of this stupid show.
Post by: Neonivek on October 20, 2015, 11:30:19 am
Heh, people have a lot of ideas about how demon deals are supposed to or not supposed to work. I'd say they can work however the author of the setting decides they should work. Maybe they only make deals because it's more fun than not making deals? Not sticking to the rules ruins the game.
I remember one of the Wish Masters movies where the villain was basically a "Evil Genie" form of demon. Now ignoring his own stupidity in the movie...
The one thing I did like about it is that he was given a wish "I wish I loved you" and he COULD have granted it by basically forcing her via magic, in fact other demons plead and mock him for not immediately doing so. Yet he just wants to see if he really could grant that wish without mind control. MIND YOU, he only needs her to essentially SAY she loves him (He is a demon, watcha gonna do?) but out of the sea of problems that movie had, that was definitely one of the few nice touches.
As for "It is anything the author wants". If demons work differently, then tell us that demons work differently. If you clearly set up Christian style demons, don't be surprised if the whole "I am possessing your baby!" might make me scoff.
Post by: Sergius on October 20, 2015, 03:32:58 pm
Heh, people have a lot of ideas about how demon deals are supposed to or not supposed to work. I'd say they can work however the author of the setting decides they should work. Maybe they only make deals because it's more fun than not making deals? Not sticking to the rules ruins the game.
As for "It is anything the author wants". If demons work differently, then tell us that demons work differently. If you clearly set up Christian style demons, don't be surprised if the whole "I am possessing your baby!" might make me scoff.
Exactly. If you're going to rip off biblical mythology entirely and not even bothering to say "our devil is different! he can also send innocents to hell if he wants, he doesn't answer to anybody! but he likes to have fun so he does it this way." Which, BTW, apparently was another bit of nonsense in that show: telling any innocent person about the whole devil thing would send both to hell. So, apparently, whoever is managing the "not hell" part of the afterlife doesn't give a crap if that person was the saintliest saint of the whole universe. At which point my conclusion is that there's only hell anyways (since nobody is actively preventing good souls to go to hell) and so why bother at all trying to avoid going there.
Post by: Starver on October 20, 2015, 04:10:22 pm
I remember one of the Wish Masters movies [...]There were several?
I saw the first. It was laughable. i.e. Not in a good way. I assume the rest went straight to Betamax?
Post by: Dirst on October 20, 2015, 10:30:48 pm
Not that he's a saint or anything. He definitely oversold the need to attack Hometree and even the massing army because, well just because he's a dick.
I don't know any canon beyond the movie but the alternative is obvious. Why couldn't the mining company dig a tunnel to get the absurdly valuable ore? Even if they inexplicably didn't have boring machines, there were other deposits to mine while the equipment was on its way. What the "blue monkeys" don't see won't hurt them.
As for Avatar 2, Jake is in a body designed to be remote controlled. He should last about twenty seconds after the reinforcements arrive. "Hey, my heart and lungs just stopped. That sucks."
If avatar tech has advanced at all, the invaders could even puppeteer him into announcing that the Sky People come in peace.
Post by: Sergius on October 21, 2015, 12:17:27 am
Post by: Bohandas on October 21, 2015, 12:27:10 am
About Avatar, a charismatic villain with a great motivation can make for a great movie. The problem with Avatar is that the movie-makers were so sure that their anti-corporate dogma was so compelling that they missed that the villain has a better motivation than the hero.
I disagree. While wanting to bone some alien chick is a poor motivation I'd still say that being a greedy SOB, a cultural chauvinist, and a flat-earth atheist is a worse one.
His avatar is basically a partial clone of him (well, his twin). The control mechanism is some nebulous synchronization thing that people believe twins have or something across all distances, some theory that was popular in the 90s I think (amplified by whatever that bed thing had). I don't think anyone can just remote control it.
Are you sure it was the '90s and not the '60s or '70s? That sounds like a hippie/new-age/woo-woo type idea.
Post by: Sergius on October 21, 2015, 12:32:29 am
Post by: Bohandas on October 21, 2015, 12:52:28 am
Nah it was about some "studies" they did with twins or astronauts or storing DNA samples and watching it "react" when something happened to the owner. I think it was on TV during the 90s in a bunch of pseudoscience shows.
That isn't related to Primary Perception, is it (The telepathy theory from that FBI polygraph guy who thought the plants were trying to communicate with him)?
Post by: LordBaal on October 21, 2015, 05:42:53 am
Post by: Dirst on October 21, 2015, 06:37:41 am
As for oddities that already exist, why do the Na'avi has one USB port when everything else has two? And no explanation why the miners couldn't just tunnel. Sure it's more expensive than strip mining, but it can't possibly be uneconomically expensive. And it's good PR.
Post by: scriver on October 21, 2015, 06:50:35 am
Post by: Dirst on October 21, 2015, 08:28:49 am
Oh they definitely have a second usb port, but they don't let you plug into it until the third date.Watch the scene where the two of them are "mated before Eywa." They get by just fine with one port each.
I just think it's funny that Eywa (which is basically Vaster than Emires and More Slow with animals) decided that it had had enough of the Sky People, but let the Na'vi go out and get themselves mowed down before joining the battle. Maybe Eywa was dissappointed in the Na'vi's ability to negotiate?
Post by: LordBaal on October 21, 2015, 09:03:28 am
One way or another that(extreme gene tampering) would explain in lore why they are so distinct to any other animal in their environment and the really bizarre "natural" internet thing (I refuse to dignify it calling it a name). The only use I find for it is to upload the consciousnesses of dying people, and then downloading it at will on another compatible body, that would allow us to achieve a immortality of sorts.
For the rest, I say simply bomb the whole thing from orbit and resume even heavier mining operations with heavier military backup.
As for the villain being charismatic, well, he was, but I found him a rather poor idiot at strategic planning.
Post by: Rolan7 on October 21, 2015, 09:26:00 am
Sadly I'm guessing they add in a bunch of forced corporate villainy out of nowhere, to retroactively justify Sully et all.
Post by: Dirst on October 21, 2015, 09:35:27 am
As for the villain being charismatic, well, he was, but I found him a rather poor idiot at strategic planning.That he was, but not as bad as the Transformers appear to be. They seem to have been to Earth and its Moon multiple times in the past and... forgot?
I can forgive that they misplaced Megatron in the first movie. From what I remember of the 80's cartoon, Starscream would try to take over for Megatron at the drop of a hat... so it stands to reason he wouldn't search very hard for his missing leader. But the rest of the series is a monumental pile of plot holes (remember that only a Prime can kill a Prime... unless it advances the plot). Thinking any deeper about it than "oooooh, explosions" is going to make your head hurt.
Post by: Dirst on October 21, 2015, 09:38:10 am
...Oh wow I didn't realize they're *actually* making a sequel, I thought this was just theoretical discussion at first. Huh, this could be really bad or good. Comes down to whether they keep trying to depict the humans as villains without much justification.Since when has a movie ever needed justification to vilify small pale invading aliens with advanced technology?
Post by: Sergius on October 21, 2015, 09:54:30 am
Unless his consciousness takes over the planet and tries to kill everyone in it, that would be something cool to see. Would still be really hard to explain.
My money is on he's going to be a ghost hologram of NatureNet(TM) and deliver some heavy handed philosophy to our heroes on its behalf or other new-age nonsense like that.
Post by: Dirst on October 21, 2015, 10:05:19 am
Not only are they making Avatar 2, also Quaritch is coming back. Not as a zombie, I think, they've said something Eywa-related. Which will probably have a really stupid asspull explanation.He's such an awesome soldier that Earth clones millions of him. And they all were useless white armor.
Unless his consciousness takes over the planet and tries to kill everyone in it, that would be something cool to see. Would still be really hard to explain.That would be entertaining. Kind of like the "evil TARDIS" episode. My only complaint with that episode is the same as almost every episode with the Ponds... they live through it.
Post by: LordBaal on October 21, 2015, 10:29:38 am
*one of my main problems with the movie, but at least that's something my suspension of disbelief can swallow.
Post by: Bohandas on October 21, 2015, 10:38:23 am
Post by: scriver on October 21, 2015, 10:56:26 am
Oh they definitely have a second usb port, but they don't let you plug into it until the third date.Watch the scene where the two of them are "mated before Eywa." They get by just fine with one port each.
That's the front port. I'm talking about the back port.
Post by: Jopax on October 21, 2015, 10:57:20 am
Seriously, the movie had nice visuals, a trope plot and nothing else going for it other than the big name director. Why does it stick so long afterwards is beyond me :S
Post by: Dirst on October 21, 2015, 10:58:53 am
One thing that's really baffling to me in this whole discussion is how on earth are we having this same damn discussion about the same damn crappy movie every ten pages or so.Do you remember that sandwich that gave you food poisoning, and where you bought it?
Seriously, the movie had nice visuals, a trope plot and nothing else going for it other than the big name director. Why does it stick so long afterwards is beyond me :S
Avatar is the same thing, but for brains.
Post by: LordBaal on October 21, 2015, 11:13:54 am
I do like the movie, specially some of the "science" on it, I find it entertaining but also I find very entertaining dissect it and point out how stupid it is on some places.
Post by: Jopax on October 21, 2015, 12:19:11 pm
Post by: LordBaal on October 21, 2015, 12:30:14 pm
Post by: TempAcc on October 21, 2015, 12:46:54 pm
Post by: Bohandas on October 21, 2015, 12:50:00 pm
Dunno, for me my white hot burning hatred over the industry bad, smelly hippies good archetype the movie slaps you on keeps me going on it.
That's not what it's about. It's a heavyhanded allegory about native americans.
Post by: Jopax on October 21, 2015, 12:51:54 pm
I got to admit that avatar was completely overhyped and forgettable. Hell, it gave me as much thrill as a goddamn transformers movie, thats how forgettable it was for me. It wasn't terrible, for sure, it was just "meh" in movie form, eye candy with a famous director's name attached to it.
This, except with Transformers I actually have a reason to be pissed because I actually liked that franchise. This couldn't even garner that much of a response.
Post by: TempAcc on October 21, 2015, 12:53:50 pm
And, of course, they're perfectly humanoid with slightly skewed proportions, which isn't bad on its own, since there have been interesting humanoid aliens in movies (star trek, predators, etc), but this combined with the other features only makes them a huge hamfisted contrived hippie mess that is a collection of cherry picked "cute" cultural bits from several real tribal societies.
Post by: Rolan7 on October 21, 2015, 01:50:38 pm
Good point about the big eyes too. They're blue too, which some people find attractive *cough*
There's some trope-blending since they're more Native Americans than Tolkein elves, but they got all the sexy parts of the elves.
(I actually kinda like Tolkein-elves as a trope, even though it's a gross mockery of actual elves who are 100x cooler. And terrifying)
Post by: LordBaal on October 21, 2015, 02:35:34 pm
tall, and mysterious. With a deep and empowering spiritual connection with the world.(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/008/067/COLLEGE-LIBERAL.jpg)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Rolan7 on October 21, 2015, 02:45:40 pm
I meant to emphasize how lazy it is to throw tolkein-elves in yet another thing, especially something so big-budget and hyped.
I forgot
Post by: LordBaal on October 21, 2015, 02:48:47 pm
Yes, I'm a terrible person. I know.
Post by: TempAcc on October 21, 2015, 04:25:07 pm
Post by: inteuniso on October 21, 2015, 11:29:17 pm
Post by: Starver on October 22, 2015, 06:50:08 am
Rolan is right on point, they do take a fair bit from tolkien elves, except without the cool things, as in, a drive for creating new things and having actual personalities (tolkien elves do have flaws, after all, some noldorim are the main reason to why melkor/morgoth got so powerful and caused the whole mess with ungoliant in the first place). They're basically really primitive and boring elves that are intentionally depicted as a cross between some generic idea of african and north american tribal societies (they even speak in a really generic sounding south african accent, IIRC).To be honest, they had to be something. Slender elf-like creatures, in this case, and being of an environment-neutral/environment-positive nature they were naturally going to share a lot of the characteristics of the typical 'enlightened native' myth, as shared between the North American and African tribespeoples of various kinds (who, it has to be pointed out, were also known to be environmentally destructive).
I can hear the cries from the alternate universe version of this forum in which the complaints were that the diminutive blue native aliens were just Smurfs without the pants'n'hat wardrobe, or the one where they were yet another "oriental is exotic" parody, or the one where the good/bad guys were so obviously the same old American/English parodies... you get the idea.
Not defending the trope, but I'm not entirely sure it's the lazy trope.
Post by: TempAcc on October 22, 2015, 07:21:42 am
One evil civilized man gets in contact with the noble savages and becomes enamoured with their oh-so-wise ways by dating a conventionally attractive noble savage girl, ends up becoming the ~The Hero~ by telling them of the evil men's plans and makes them stronger by teaching them about things they don't know. The noble savages suffer some losses but end up taking out far stronger force through virtue of their magical noble savage ways. However, it is made clear that they would never have been able to do it without the The Hero's help.
By the end of the plot, The Hero chooses to stay with the noble savages because he has found his one true love and a way of living he considers superior.
Its basically a slightly modified pocahontas and modern elements added to it. Instead of evil european conquerors we get a powerful (and very american) evil and greedy corporation with no regard for the savages wellbeing. Instead of conventionally attractive noble savages with an implied link to nature, we get conventionally attractive furry alien noble savages with a LITERAL link to nature.
I get that they made the aliens conventionally attractive to make the whole romance plot device appealing to most people, since they couldn't make them into noble savage squid/arthropod/reptilian beings without causing squick on most of the audience, but if the plot and the setting were actualy interesting, they wouldn't have to hamfist a romance subplot into it, because without it, all they would have left would be an overused plot with a furry wet dream makeup.
Post by: LordBaal on October 22, 2015, 07:26:57 am
I would have liked the native pandorians to be more like that, the problem is, when you have truly alien aliens, then you can't wave your pretentious big-bad-corporation-against-wise-good-hippies/natives dick. An then you'll have to come up with some really good and interesting narrative of the first contact with intelligent species of another planet, implications of it back on Earth and so many other interesting stuff most people would yawn at it.
BTW wasn't a The Sparrow (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sparrow_%28novel%29) movie with Brad Pitt on the works?
Oh boy I bet that if he does again what he did with the World War Z book then that movie is going to suck balls as well.
EDIT: Thank God the author realized Brad Pitt would eat her book and shit a movie of it, so she revoked the rights for movies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sparrow_%28novel%29#Film.2C_television_and_theatrical_adaptations). Now there's a TV series being done by the channel that makes The Walking Dead. If they don't stretch it beyond necessity to profit from endless seasons it could work. The book could comfortably be done as a mini series even.
Post by: Starver on October 22, 2015, 07:42:44 am
Depends how cynical one wants to be. I'm more 'meh' (with a side-order of "nice visuals!") about the film but obviously you're less of a fan.
Post by: Jopax on October 22, 2015, 07:51:07 am
Post by: LordBaal on October 22, 2015, 07:59:38 am
Wait, how was the abomination of WWZ Pitts fault? Did he do anything other than be the main guy?I think Plan B, Brad Pitt's production company was the one behind the production of the film, introducing all of the crap that made the movie what it is.
Now, don't get me wrong, the movie by itself is not that bad, it's entertaining which is the point of most kind of movies. And I consider Pitt to be good actor himself*. However I read the book long time before the movie, and my opinion is that the movie is really subpar when compared to the book.
*which is why not every actor that has enough money to produce/direct movies should go for it.
Post by: TempAcc on October 22, 2015, 07:59:53 am
After a while (re: Avatar, and this being @TempAcc, before LordBaal got in the way), they're all "old tired narratives". Either the old standard Monomyth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth), one of its rival long-standing monomyth alternatives. You get deliberate subversions, occasionally, but even then you can usually reduce it to the exact same reduction as a previous example.
Depends how cynical one wants to be. I'm more 'meh' (with a side-order of "nice visuals!") about the film but obviously you're less of a fan.
Depends on what you consider cynism. Its completely possible to take old themes and ideas and make them interesting by adding your own twist to it. I mean, look at warhammer/warhammer 40k and warcraft, who took generic fantasy race concepts and made them genuinely interesting by adding their own twists to them, while avatar just took a tired narrative and setting, put it in space and added furries to it. But hey, to each its own :v
Post by: Dirst on October 22, 2015, 08:50:19 am
Why does every anime character with superpowers seem compelled to pull I Am Not Lefthanded (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/IAmNotLeftHanded) in every single fight? Even when the audience has already seen the character use more impressive stuff in the past?
"Hmmm, this guy is tougher than I thought. Time to use my powers!"
"Wow, he's really tough. Time to use my real powers!"
"Ow, this is starting to hurt. Serious power time!"
"Oh crap, he's been toying with me (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/JustToyingWithThem) the whole time! Look at that power he just pulled out of his ass..."
Post by: LordBaal on October 22, 2015, 09:01:16 am
Perhaps you would attract too much attention, maybe your enemies could figure out exactly how to outdo you, or could it be that exerting that much power might damage you or run out the source of your powers.
But for when there's no excuse, yes, its pretty dumb.
Post by: Dirst on October 22, 2015, 09:32:04 am
Bad narrative? Or perhaps clichés to give more tension to the fight? One also might wonder, depending on the setting and context, that going around always showing up your biggest power might be detrimental on the long run.It's not restricted to anime nor to individual characters. It was particularly grating in Falling Skies when the aliens, more than once, pulled something out of reserve that had the potential to end the entire conflict had it been used from the beginning. Or failed to use an incredibly effective tool again for no reason whatsoever. In reality, the writers were introducing stuff they just thought up without any regard for why it wouldn't have been used before then.
Perhaps you would attract too much attention, maybe your enemies could figure out exactly how to outdo you, or could it be that exerting that much power might damage you or run out the source of your powers.
But for when there's no excuse, yes, its pretty dumb.
I did finally stop watching that series when
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: LordBaal on October 22, 2015, 10:16:49 am
For example on skyline the invasion, which is an awful movie, the aliens are invincible monsters capable of rebuilding themselves from a nuclear blast, in short they are magic, and no, is not a case of sufficient technology is confused with magic, it is stupid magic and plot armour. Anyway, they harvest humans for their brains? WTF? Why would they need wet ware like that if they are capable of traversing the vast distances of space they are more than capable of building chips, or hey, making clones of a perfect brain or use the same magic they employ to rebuild from a nuclear explosion or something.
I keep imagining the robots failing to function out of a million ways because different brain diseases, imperfections and what not. And finally the protagonist (no spoilers because no one saw or care about that excuse of a movie) is able to steal the machine his brain is because of love. I have news, he's not the only one that loves his wife/girlfriend with burning passion, heck, the douche is not even a great example of it. So ,how long before literally millions of other humans do this too and the aliens met an ironic and premature end?
Biology on realistic basis should be really incompatible and even so different that you might have difficulties recognizing alien life the first time you see it.
Post by: Jopax on October 22, 2015, 10:47:57 am
But yeah, other than the cool alien designs that movie had nothing going for it, heck, they ran out of budget before finishing it so the big finale where he busts out in an alien body to save his girl is done as a fucking slideshow of paintings :V
Post by: Sergius on October 22, 2015, 12:46:19 pm
Post by: PTTG?? on October 22, 2015, 01:04:20 pm
Also, the brain processing speed exponential increase really bugs me.
Post by: werty892 on October 22, 2015, 05:27:56 pm
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on October 22, 2015, 06:09:07 pm
This thread is gonna explode the moment the new star wars comes out.
In J.J. we trust.
Post by: itisnotlogical on October 22, 2015, 06:17:48 pm
I want to belieeeeeeeve.
Post by: Neonivek on October 22, 2015, 06:21:39 pm
Not the "Terrible movies are terrible" thread :P
Hense why there wasn't a huge Fantastic Four discussion.
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on October 22, 2015, 06:38:10 pm
If it's not as bad as The Phantom Menace, then I swear to God that I will not complain.
I want to belieeeeeeeve.
Oh boy, don't get me started. Phantom Menace is easily the best of the prequels and, without Jar Jar, a pretty good movie. Pod Racing, Darth Maul, the droid army reveal, cool as fuck jedi, bro what more do you want? Episode I is the piece of media that made me fall in love with sci-fi.
Post by: Akura on October 22, 2015, 09:01:05 pm
He was the comic relief guy... only everyone was plenty relieved enough already thank you.
Post by: Il Palazzo on October 23, 2015, 05:36:57 am
Can you feel that? That disturbance in the force, as if millions of sci-fi fans suddenly cried in terror?If it's not as bad as The Phantom Menace, then I swear to God that I will not complain.
I want to belieeeeeeeve.
Oh boy, don't get me started. Phantom Menace is easily the best of the prequels and, without Jar Jar, a pretty good movie. Pod Racing, Darth Maul, the droid army reveal, cool as fuck jedi, bro what more do you want? Episode I is the piece of media that made me fall in love with sci-fi.
Post by: LordBaal on October 23, 2015, 07:26:19 am
The midiclorians and jarjar are two things that where very annoying but something you can simply dismiss. If you wanna have a laugh go ahead and read this: 78 Reasons to Hate Star Wars Episode I, The Phantom Menace (http://www.chefelf.com/starwars/ep1.php) it accurately pin point most flaws of the movie with a lot of humour.
Post by: Jopax on October 23, 2015, 08:22:06 am
Post by: LordBaal on October 23, 2015, 09:03:53 am
To paraphrase my friend, Revenge of the Sith is the worst of the prequels because it manages to kill two of the most badass characters in the series, Windu and Dooku. After that it's all downhill and there's no way it can improve, even if they tried, they can't bring Lee back to life xdThat could be, but I jizzed at the starting scene. I play a lot the mod republic at war for the game empire at war only to recapture that feeling on the space battle.
Post by: Starver on October 23, 2015, 09:04:40 am
they can't bring Lee back to life xdLee did have a tendency to magically levitate and spin his enemies, that year, though...
Not his fault, but somewhat distracting to not just get typecast as the rogue wizard kind but to basically repeat a scene just with different robes...
Post by: Bohandas on October 23, 2015, 12:22:55 pm
I didn't even mind Jar Jar all that much.
He was the comic relief guy... only everyone was plenty relieved enough already thank you.
Yeah, I don't get why people hated him so much. At least he wasn't an ewok.
Post by: i2amroy on October 23, 2015, 02:06:36 pm
even if they tried, they can't bring Lee back to life xdBut we can through the power of modern technology! They already brought that dead actor back in Fast & Furious 7 and everything! :P
Post by: scriver on October 24, 2015, 06:26:05 am
Post by: Bohandas on October 24, 2015, 01:18:54 pm
Post by: i2amroy on October 24, 2015, 01:51:54 pm
They'd have to rise from the grave to sue over it.Plus it was the fact that he had signed the contract for the film already, it's just that he died halfway through filming it. :P
Post by: Starver on October 24, 2015, 01:59:49 pm
They'd have to rise from the grave to sue over it.How about some enterprising soul (NPI!) uses archive footage of a deceased individual to recreate a simalcrum of their old self capable of representing themselves in court to gain control of their own post-mortem image?
(Actually, that could be an interesting short story. The creation of a virtual-actor so refined that it proceeds to gain autonomy, and maybe even suffrage, and gets to live its own after-life...)
((Actually, now I come to think of it, arguably something very similar has already been done! The holographic Garibaldi in the Babylon 5 episode called... hang on, looking it up... The Deconstruction of Falling Stars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Deconstruction_of_Falling_Stars). The 2762 bit. I love that episode. And not just that bit. Which makes me ashamed I only remembered it for what it was whilst already replying with the 'new' idea I had.))
Post by: Bohandas on October 24, 2015, 02:28:20 pm
They'd have to rise from the grave to sue over it.Plus it was the fact that he had signed the contract for the film already, it's just that he died halfway through filming it. :P
Like Bela Lugosi in Plan 9 From Outer Space!
Post by: H4zardZ1 on October 24, 2015, 10:27:19 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on October 25, 2015, 08:41:10 pm
So the main character SEVERAL TIMES gets the total 100% justification to shoot several 'bad guys' but never EVER does because they are American. Even when lives are at stake. It would at least be justified if he was say, a pacifist... but no he will happily gun down anyone unless you were born on American soil.
On the plus side there was a HILLARIOUS fit of stupidity movie where a guy... on foot... manages to outrun a car and several helicopters.
Post by: Bohandas on October 26, 2015, 12:41:25 am
I forgot what that film name is, but the ending is very odd.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hit in what direction and orientation? Because I could totally see something like that busting up he spine as well if the head is driven towards the body (or busting up the upper spine if the head is driven backwards or forewards)
Post by: Bohandas on October 26, 2015, 01:05:51 am
Post by: scriver on October 26, 2015, 02:24:02 am
Ok here was one in The Green Mile
So the main character SEVERAL TIMES gets the total 100% justification to shoot several 'bad guys' but never EVER does because they are American. Even when lives are at stake. It would at least be justified if he was say, a pacifist... but no he will happily gun down anyone unless you were born on American soil.
On the plus side there was a HILLARIOUS fit of stupidity movie where a guy... on foot... manages to outrun a car and several helicopters.
...Which adaptation of the Green Mile did you see? Are you sure it wasn't a Hulk movie instead?
Post by: Xantalos on October 26, 2015, 04:21:32 am
In "Ghost Rider" what was the point of Carter Slade's transformation? He could only change one more time and he kind of wasted it; he didn't use it to help Blaze and he didn't use it for his own benefit either.Carter probably had some 4th wall senses and figured he might as well look badass before his screen time was over.
Post by: H4zardZ1 on October 26, 2015, 07:37:26 am
If the legs and arms was broken, it is definitely not normal. It was hit straight only on the head, then the bus stops entirely.I forgot what that film name is, but the ending is very odd.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hit in what direction and orientation? Because I could totally see something like that busting up he spine as well if the head is driven towards the body (or busting up the upper spine if the head is driven backwards or forewards)
Post by: wierd on October 26, 2015, 07:58:36 am
How much red matter does the vulcan science council send with spock? pretty much enough to cause widespread genocide across the flipping quadrant. How much does he need to do the job assigned? a small syringe full. what, did they think he might need to try a few million times or something? I dont care how "cool" it looks. It is illogical to send that much, and thus not in line with the vulcan science council.
That's not even considering the absurdity of the plot.
clearly, the star going nova is several hundred light years away, and not the star of the romulan home system. In either case, this is set in a setting where faster than light data transmission exists. The romulans would either have been aware of this impending doom DECADES before it hits thier home system (since a gamma ray burst travels at light speed, and "nearby" stars are typically in the 50 to 100ly distance range) or would have been able to examine the problem directly if it was thier home star system, and turning it into a black hole with red matter is supposed to help how in that case? No, Adams does NOT get to be thrown a bone on this. The plot is flimsy as f$#k. In either case the romulan star empire would have ample time to evacuate thier planet-- you know, since they have superluminal travel, communications, and scanning technologies and all.
Since the rest of the movie flows from this faulty pretext.... Blech!
Post by: LordBaal on October 26, 2015, 08:03:51 am
The punishment for general zod and his band of emos is surviving the destruction of the planet. Even when I can consider that it might be some nasty psychological torture, it doesn't further anything else. It's like condemning some murderer to reverse capital punishment, where everyone else in the planet kill himself so he'll be alone and angry and whatever....
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 08:23:02 am
Ok here was one in The Green Mile
So the main character SEVERAL TIMES gets the total 100% justification to shoot several 'bad guys' but never EVER does because they are American. Even when lives are at stake. It would at least be justified if he was say, a pacifist... but no he will happily gun down anyone unless you were born on American soil
The Green Mile that was set in a prison? It's been a while but I don't remember anything like that. Does Tom Hanks gun down any people in that!? Are you sure you don't have a different movie in mind here?
Post by: Dirst on October 26, 2015, 08:26:19 am
They'd have to rise from the grave to sue over it.From my favorite line in RoboCop 2... "They always have families."
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 08:30:49 am
Ok here was one in The Green Mile
So the main character SEVERAL TIMES gets the total 100% justification to shoot several 'bad guys' but never EVER does because they are American. Even when lives are at stake. It would at least be justified if he was say, a pacifist... but no he will happily gun down anyone unless you were born on American soil
The Green Mile that was set in a prison? It's been a while but I don't remember anything like that. Does Tom Hanks gun down any people in that!? Are you sure you don't have a different movie in mind here?
Maybe I got the wrong name. The one about Bourne (ok same actor... but not really) who is in Iraq or Afkanistan...
Post by: Starver on October 26, 2015, 08:34:04 am
Dont get me started on the startrek reboot movies.I'm not a great fan, but it's interesting to see (and one wonders whether the progress of the films earns Spock a bigger file than the "seventeen temporal violations" that Sisko was told that Temporal Investigations had recorded for Kirk...
Quote
How much red matter does the vulcan science council send with spock?Perhaps, like a buffet, if there isn't too much, there isn't enough! Being prepared for any number of interventions would be more logical than just the one 'dose', and the chance of losing that. (Or maybe a small quantity cannot be carried, indefinitely. There needs to be a large bubble of it, from which the appropriate quantity can be safely extracted almost immediately prior to use. The opposite of a fissile material, or exactly the same way as an evaporating black hole itself, without the side-effects.)
It's been a while, so I can't even begin to address your other problems, properly. Although superluminal 'blasts' seem to be a thing in the ST universe. (Except when a currently conked-out warp-drive needs to be hurriedly fixed, thanks to some Plot, said fix being applied just in time to switch from impulse to warp just in time to get up to speed to 'surf' the endangering wavefront of the 'merely' high-fraction-of-C explosive ring. (Tried moving out of the plane of the explosion, anyone?)) Remember, though, that E=mp2, where "p" is the ultimate speed of plot... ;)
Post by: Starver on October 26, 2015, 08:45:19 am
Just like in the man of steel. Why the fuck didn't they simple evacuated to another planet. They did have colonies that were promptly abandoned, spaceships very much capable of going to space going unused, because fuck logic, we need a plot.Classic "hyper-advanced but decadent". They didn't even trust the local equivalent of "global warming revelations" . Those 'colonies' were, at best, forgotten outposts manned for at least some time by highly irregular kryptonian individuals, while everybody else is perfectly happy to enjoy their apparently-utopian home environment. Mostly. The 'El's aren't so blind, but they're in a minority (as they are in most continuities) and have their hands tied (politically and/or socially) by the overwhelmingly insular majority.
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 08:50:32 am
You probably mean Green Zone then, which I haven't seenOk here was one in The Green Mile
So the main character SEVERAL TIMES gets the total 100% justification to shoot several 'bad guys' but never EVER does because they are American. Even when lives are at stake. It would at least be justified if he was say, a pacifist... but no he will happily gun down anyone unless you were born on American soil
The Green Mile that was set in a prison? It's been a while but I don't remember anything like that. Does Tom Hanks gun down any people in that!? Are you sure you don't have a different movie in mind here?
Maybe I got the wrong name. The one about Bourne (ok same actor... but not really) who is in Iraq or Afkanistan...
Definitely get around to The Green Mile one day, it's a good film.
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 08:51:53 am
Actually a good excuse they could have pulled is just to say that Clark's ride actually took a very long time (say, 100 years)... BOOM! no home planet + 100 years = species died out.
Post by: LordBaal on October 26, 2015, 08:57:55 am
In the film it looks like anyone could call a space cab minutes before the planet blows up for whatever stupid reason, and literally go anywhere else. They don't seem decadent, they seem overly stupid.
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 08:58:57 am
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 09:01:15 am
It would have been better to project something of sufficiently advance to send some spaceships out but not everyone.
In the film it looks like anyone could call a space cab minutes before the planet blows up for whatever stupid reason, and literally go anywhere else. They don't seem decadent, they seem overly stupid.
MOST of the time the disaster was too sudden to really do anything. It would be like leading an evacuation of a planet in a constant 10 rating earthquake... on the spot without prior set up.
There are more Superman nitpicks but they're more about the franchise as a whole rather than any particular adaptation. e.g. if Kryptonians gain superpowers from yellow stars, why have they never exploited that fact in their history? The economic benefits would have been massive.
Because they are far too advanced for that to matter. Heck I don't even know if they have money.
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 09:04:12 am
EDIT: This stems from the deep premise: "<alien dude> is the last of his kind" who were smart enough to get to Earth, but apparently not smart enough to get anywhere else.
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 09:15:17 am
And by "No money" I am bringing up the fact that there is no reward for doing so.
They made other colonies and eventually abandoned them because Krypton might as well be the golden city.
Super strong kyptonians for mining? When they can build as many mining robots as they could ever want at the push of a button? All for materials that ultimately there is no real purpose for because Kyptonians can create far better materials themselves (many nearly indestructible)
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 09:17:27 am
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 09:20:02 am
But it still makes no sense for the many renegate Kryptonians that we see not to have created colonies. either you have regenades who seek personal power, and thus got colonies yellow stars, or you get all conformists who are satisfied with their lot on the home star. A mix doesn't work.
Well Reelya... What you are describing is the equivalent of a Business man who wants power and does this by picking up a bastard sword and some platemail and going to fight Barbarians. All for a mud hut instead of the luxurious mansion he used to live in.
If you are a renegade you typically work within Krypton because... well... Everything else might as well be the boonies.
I mean say what you want about "Renegades" usually the second REAL work and sacrifice hits them... they fold.
Post by: LordBaal on October 26, 2015, 09:23:33 am
And for the super sexy Kripton, why then didn't they terraformed other planets to mimic it? A bunch of "rebel" idiots (emos) try to do it and almost succeeded if not for plot amour. Then what stopped them doing it before, in a organized manner. Specially when we take into account that other powerful, technological advanced and super strong space faring races do live in the DC universe, and eventually would have conquered the Kriptonians in a beat, so becoming sitting ducks seems like the wrong way to go.
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 09:24:44 am
Post by: Dirst on October 26, 2015, 09:26:46 am
But it still makes no sense for the many renegade Kryptonians that we see not to have created colonies. either you have regenades who seek personal power, and thus would create colonies around yellow stars, or you get all conformists who are satisfied with their lot on the home star. A mix doesn't work.In at least one adaptation, Brainiac was asked point-blank if the seismic events were a serious threat, and it said there was nothing to worry about. If only HAL 9000 had a crew that trusting of its technology.
Post by: Sergius on October 26, 2015, 09:27:08 am
No, Adams does NOT get to be thrown a bone on this. The plot is flimsy as f$#k.
Who's Adams? You mean Abrahams?
I don't think he actually wrote the plot of the movie tho.
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 09:32:39 am
It's illogical from any point of view.
Some aspects of it are, some aren't.
I mean I can understand Krypton itself being like... the golden city that no one REALLY wants to leave unless it is their duty or job and the more villainous Kryptonians really can't settle for anything less. There aren't too many Americans flying out to 'uncivilized' parts of the world to kill their population and take claim of them for their own gain (and I mean... living there). But why aren't there diplomats? Deep space scientists? anthropologists?
I mean they are described as scientists and they cured every disease and ailment ever afflicted on them... So it isn't like they need any medical scientists anymore.
People do go out and exploit the boonies however. That's how the countries both of us are living in got started. And clearly with Krypton tech + superpowers the boonies wouldn't stay boonies for very long. Presumably Kryptonians live a LONG time too, and the race should be frikkin ancient, so this just should have happened. The fact is they only exist as a thin premise for where Superman came from and why there aren't any more.
Yeah if they could. But I'll put it like this Reelya
Kyptons are so advanced that as long as they are on Kypton they have a magic box. If they want it they can reach inside and pull it out with absolutely no effort.
There is no materials, labor, devices, or anything they need from anyone else. They want for nothing. If they want power, they only want power for the satisfaction of lording it over others.
The Shuttle Superman came in... is the equivalent of a rocket ship someone built in their garage and it is still one of the most advanced spaceships in the known galaxy.
Post by: Rolan7 on October 26, 2015, 09:37:20 am
But there was only one world that actually mattered to them... Amber, the light which casts the shadows. Even those who didn't plot for the crown, eventually got bored anywhere else.
Probably similar: Time lords caring about Gallifrey, and the D'ni caring about their home (Myst). They all could have escaped and lived as gods, but that was unthinkable (for most of them).
It's partially a narrative device to make a more interesting story, but it also makes some sense. They treasure their sacred homelands.
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 09:45:51 am
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 09:48:25 am
The problem with all of those is that it has to apply to everyone in those settings. e.g. English people who went to America should have all gone back to Mother England by that logic.
There was the possibility to make a better life for themselves in America, as well as the promise of a LOT more land then they could ever get at home (EVERYONE was essentially a land owner in America)
England wasn't exactly a golden city where all their dreams could come true was it?
There was a clear effort to reward ratio. I am saying that there is no reward for leaving Krypton.
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 09:51:38 am
No reward ... except having the same level of tech + the superpowers with no downside. Which (nonsensically) not a single colonist made use of in the now-canon hundreds of thousands of years of Kyptonian advanced civilization. It would only take one family of colonists in all that time ... then you'd have second-generation people who would lose the superpowers if they went back to Krypton. So, yeah it just doesn't work. Because it takes ALL people to never have thought about settling elsewhere or wanting the superpowers.
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 09:55:17 am
But if we're talking the level of tech available to Gallifrey or Krypton, it's also unbelievable that you couldn't create the same quality of life virtually anywhere. Actually more so with Krypton since it's canon that they're a lot more robust away from that planet.
Technology supporting other technology built over many decades or even centuries (as they were reaching the apex of their technology).
But WHY would they want to? That is a lot of work for no real purpose. Your just separating from the home planet, and the support system built there, for no reason then "Because I can".
No reward ... except having the same level of tech + the superpowers with no downside. Which it makes no sense that not a single colonist made use of in the now-canon hundreds of thousands of years of Kyptonian advanced civilization. It would only take one family of colonists in all that time ... then you'd have second-generations people who would lose the superpowers if they went back to Krypton. So, yeah it just doesn't work. Because it takes ALL people to never have thought about settling elsewhere or wanting the superpowers.
They are Kryptonians... if they want super powers they can give themselves super powers. They already have super powers in the form of technology.
I am not exactly going to chose to go without internet for 40 years laboring away to build a log cabin... Just so I have laser vision.
Heck it was already long since proven that if the Kryptonians REALLY wanted to... they could have turned their red sun into a yellow sun.
Once again if they really want something, they can do it from home. (outside things you HAVE to leave home for... which is where MY Nitpick comes in... Seriously no diplomats?)
Post by: Sergius on October 26, 2015, 10:21:04 am
There are people who exactly choose to go without internet for 40 years to labor away to build a log cabin.
Neo, this seems to me more like being puzzled that other people want... to get stuff that you aren't interested in or wouldn't be interested in in a fictional setting?
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 10:24:38 am
Unless Kryptonians have a hive mind, it makes no sense for ALL Kryptonians to want/not want the exact same thing.
Well Hive Mind or not being human... >_> (but ignore this point the Kryptonians are basically human and to my knowledge there is no genetic aspect that makes them HAVE to be in Krypton like say Vulcans... nor an overwhelming technological requirement to return to Gallafry like the Timelords)
What I mean is that whatever they want... Kypton has it. Want super powers? You can give yourself super powers. Want Gold? You got gold. Want lots of land? BOOM!
The only thing a Krypton might want that the home planet doesn't have is, for example, power over the weak. Which has happened quite a few times before, but they usually deal with it by sending them to the Phantom zone.
Neo, this seems to me more like being puzzled that other people want... to get stuff that you aren't interested in or wouldn't be interested in in a fictional setting?
Well no the major argument I am arguing against is "Of course Kyptonians would have Colonies! Why wouldn't they? There is so much for them out there".
And my counter argument is "No, there is nothing for them. Everything they could ever want is back on Krypton"
Post by: Sergius on October 26, 2015, 10:26:08 am
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 10:27:01 am
Very well, explain why they don't want superpowers on top of everything that they already have?
Because they don't care and even the Yellow Sun super powers is inferior to their technology.
It is a bit extreme for something you already have. It would be like driving 10 hours to McDonalds to get a BigMac... when you have a McDonalds in your kitchen
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 10:29:00 am
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 10:30:27 am
No that can't be right. Since yellow sun superpowers would have allowed them to get out of the way of the exploding planet, and their technology didn't allow that.
Sure... Just fly right up into space with no oxygen, warp speed, or navigation... and survive a huge radioactive planet exploding with the one material that can outright kill you.
Post by: Sergius on October 26, 2015, 10:32:41 am
Very well, explain why they don't want superpowers on top of everything that they already have?
Because they don't care and even the Yellow Sun super powers is inferior to their technology.
It is a bit extreme for something you already have. It would be like driving 10 hours to McDonalds to get a BigMac... when you have a McDonalds in your kitchen
That would work if Kryptonians never left their homes and had everything inside, never went out at all, never met with other Kryptonians. Never had to walk. So, basically, all Kryptonians are hermits and happy about it?
Who says they have to drive 10 hours? You just said they could turn their sun yellow, to have the benefit for the entire homeworld forever. Then, they never have to drive again, ever. They could use super-vision and super-speed and super-smarts to make their technology a million times better.
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 10:33:51 am
Who says they have to drive 10 hours? You just said they could turn their sun yellow, to have the benefit for the entire homeworld forever. Then, they never have to drive again, ever.
Yeah, they just don't care. Mostly because there is no mystique to super powers like we have... mostly because they have access to it anyway.
Post by: i2amroy on October 26, 2015, 10:37:44 am
Seriously no diplomats?)You don't negotiate with insects. :P
That said I'm with Reelya here, it is kinda strange viewed in a modern day view, though of course you also need to remember that Superman was first written in the early 1930's, which put it simultaneously still just a little bit before the golden age of science fiction started (late 1930's) and still 20 or so years before our first ever actual scientific exploration to space (as opposed to the german missiles of war). It's important to remember that at this point just the idea of "he came from another world" was still a pretty revolutionary one in america, and the idea of another planet actually being sensible on it's own (instead of just being a caricature of earth) was still one that had yet to be really developed.
Heck even modern days the (WARNING)Planet of Hats (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlanetOfHats) trope is still rather common, so I'm not exactly surprised if canon of something that was written 80 years ago pulls on that trope a bit. Because over the years of superhero stuff we've determined at least one solid point, you don't mess with the key points of a superheroes backstory. You can bend things all you want and fiddle with the details, but Krypton has still got to explode with all souls aboard, and Mary Jane has still got to die. To do so otherwise is to invite fan backlash similar to what we saw with the more recent fantastic four film (which had plenty of other problems, but there was still plenty of backlash on the interwebs as well). And when you are trying to make money, well, backlash isn't necessarily a thing you want to be having.
Edit: AAAAHHHHH! I've been surrounded by ninjas!
Quote
Warning - while you were typing 7 new replies have been posted
Post by: Sergius on October 26, 2015, 10:38:18 am
They could just wear clothes that block out Red sunlight and filters yellow sunlight into them Sergius...Who says they have to drive 10 hours? You just said they could turn their sun yellow, to have the benefit for the entire homeworld forever. Then, they never have to drive again, ever.
Yeah, they just don't care. Mostly because there is no mystique to super powers like we have... mostly because they have access to it anyway.
I seems to me that you're imprinting an extreme form of apathy in them that is never actually shown, just to justify actions that make no sense. None of them have these superpowers, even granted by magic kryptonian cloth. They just walk everywhere and use crappy flying taxis.
Pretty much all of their "quality of life" technology becomes irrelevant with superpowers. All they would need is tech to do the really interesting things like changing the colors of suns.
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 10:45:56 am
Quote
I seems to me that you're imprinting an extreme form of apathy in them that is never actually shown
I dunno... you live in the modern world with many things that are wonderous and fantastical to people who lived 100-1000 years ago.
I am sure the fact that you have immunization shots and don't have to worry about catching the plague and dying is astounding... But I don't see you jumping up and down and fawning over it Sergius.
But that is fine I said my part really. Mostly I just don't find the whole "Why don't they colonialize?" to be an issue, it goes against Economics to suggest they would go elsewhere.
---
Actually that is something that is quite interesting about Fiction is that they are often written from a very reader POV.
So if say... someone has magical powers... in a world where EVERYONE has magical powers. They still will treat them like they are some sort of fantastical magical power even though to them it should be mundane.
It is kind of why I look at "Live On" an Anime with interest. Because they have cards that bind and summon huge monsters! but they are so mundane to them that for the most part the majority of people just ignore it... and it is even considered "ill-mannered" to transform into a monster in public.
Post by: LordBaal on October 26, 2015, 10:49:05 am
Had they have something in the movie to point out why they did it, it would have worked far better. As it stands is seems they let themselves be wiped out while deliberately saving criminals just for the laughs.
Resources run out, space too. Unless they control strictly their population numbers and resource use they'll end up needed more places to live and get resources too.
Krypton in the movie seems like a pretty barren world.
It would stand to reason that at least some space miners or people in orbit would left and survive.
Also for this they would need a hive mind as suggested.
However they where in fact breeding by some kind of DNA tinkering and cloning of sorts, each individual with a purpose even before being born, superman father went against the "law" and conceived him the "natural way". So in retrospective it seems that indeed they choose to die like a bunch of morons because they were in fact big morons, programmed to be morons from before being conceived.
Then why was superman dad special? Why he was the only one to see what was happening? Which are the odds of a population in the millions(?) that only a single guy will realize they are going to die?
Post by: Bohandas on October 26, 2015, 10:51:52 am
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 10:52:31 am
Woa... I unleashed this damn. I'll I said is that is stupid and without explanation of the why they abandoned their colonies.
Had they have something in the movie to point out why they did it, it would have worked far better. As it stands is seems they let themselves be wiped out while deliberately saving criminals just for the laughs.
Well in the original series usually the colonies just amounted to experiments or temporary colonies for some other purpose.
So if they wanted to study, say, a black hole. They will build a colony near it. Study it, then move back home when they are done.
But this is Man of Steel where Superman is Batman.
So the actual explanation is that they all whined and cried themselves to death.
With regard to Superman, the current issue is somewhat canceled out by another plot hole, to with that his claim to being one of only a few remaining Kryptonians is extremely incorrect. In addition to there being no shortage of kryptonian convicts in the phantom zone there is also the Bottle City of Kandor and the entire planet Daxam
Daxam was REALLY short lived... I don't even think it survived a single story.
Post by: Sergius on October 26, 2015, 11:02:01 am
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 11:03:38 am
Post by: Sergius on October 26, 2015, 11:04:40 am
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 11:06:51 am
Doesn't seem to me that it is a healthy environment for nitpicks to flourish, lots of nitpick putdowns, people are just going to take their nitpicks and homeschool them.
So your nitpicking that I am nitpicking about nitpicking?
And no, I usually leave people's nitpicks alone because it usually just amounts to something that just bugs them. I was just trying to explain the justification the series gives as well as my own feelings based on that. I never thought Reelya would suddenly change his mind via magic.
This is one of the VERY few times in this thread I have even made more then one post in response.
Post by: Sergius on October 26, 2015, 11:09:02 am
So your nitpicking that I am nitpicking about nitpicking?
Sure, why not. But we need a separate thread to nitpick the nitpicks, and another to nitpick that thread.
Quote from: Neonivek
And no, I usually leave people's nitpicks alone because it usually just amounts to something that just bugs them. I was just trying to explain the justification the series gives as well as my own feelings based on that. I never thought Reelya would suddenly change his mind via magic.
This is one of the VERY few times in this thread I have even made more then one post in response.
Yeah, that's exactly why it seems out of place, there seems to be an obsession to criticize that specific nitpick... seriously, one or two posts is one thing, but at this point this is defending, not explaining bad logic of the authors.
The explanation that Kryptonians are literally bred to be this kind of apathic and hive minded actually makes more sense than "well, it's easier to just lie on bed and eat thru a straw so why bother doing anything else? You don't know since you have never tried it!"
Post by: LordBaal on October 26, 2015, 11:12:30 am
(http://i.imgur.com/cCo5r6U.jpg)
Post by: Arx on October 26, 2015, 11:18:10 am
:P Couldn't resist the urge to meta-meta-nitpick.
Post by: Bohandas on October 26, 2015, 11:18:48 am
See:
http://greenlantern.wikia.com/wiki/Daxam
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eradicator_(comics)#Fictional_character_biography
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 11:19:55 am
Soon he will down a cape and cowl and become NitpickMan!
Post by: Sergius on October 26, 2015, 11:20:01 am
It really should have been "How many nits would a nitpick pick if a nitpick could pick nits?". Ugh, lazy forum posters these days...
:P Couldn't resist the urge to meta-meta-nitpick.
I thought about it, but last time I tried that people told me how unfunny I was. So it was on purpose.
Anyway, the whole argument about "Kryptonians are so advanced nothing matters" boils down to this 8)
(http://www.ew.com/sites/default/files/i/2011/02/23/WALL-E-humans_320.jpg)
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 11:22:16 am
Post by: Drakale on October 26, 2015, 11:25:40 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: LordBaal on October 26, 2015, 11:26:21 am
That's it, Kryptonian society effectively ceased to exist long before superman was born, only a mockery of said society, remaining only in image with these "automatons" beings maintaining it, basically biological robots with the illusion of awareness but limited to their preprogrammed role in this doomed play of a society.
Which further the question, what made superman dad's special?
Post by: Bohandas on October 26, 2015, 11:27:16 am
Just like in the man of steel. Why the fuck didn't they simple evacuated to another planet. They did have colonies that were promptly abandoned, spaceships very much capable of going to space going unused, because fuck logic, we need a plot.
Again, at least some of the colonies were sabotaged by Eradicator
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 12:24:39 pm
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 12:28:32 pm
Aka the "ConvenientPlotPoint-inator"
Well no, because the way it is introduced in the stories is that you slowly unfold the mystery as to why there are no Kryptonians.
It isn't that they go "NOPE! no Kryptonians because handwavium"
A series of fatal events and circumstances lead to their demise. The major one being the sudden and unexpected destruction of Krypton. Want to learn about some of the other events that surrounded them? Read this comic!
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 12:33:44 pm
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 12:40:05 pm
The very fact that it's a recognizable plot hole is why we have duct tape like the Eradicator or the completely incompatible alternatives in every single Superman continuity.
Well no, it never has to be answered.
Here is a question: Why didn't any of Bruce Wayne's extended family adopt him? Did he not have any? Well that is incredibly unlikely. Did they not want him? He is rich why wouldn't they?
Do these questions need to be answered? No.
Can they be used as stories? Yes.
That is what the Eradicator is... A story that adds onto the demise of Krypton. Something the JLA cartoon did well when they combined him with Brainiac (a great touch)
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 12:43:37 pm
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 12:45:03 pm
No, they did cover that in the Silver Age. His uncle brought him up. So they clearly recognized that it was a plothole left over from Golden Age Batman.
Which is only Canon in the Silver Age.
Post by: Reelya on October 26, 2015, 12:46:23 pm
Ok checked it out and Alfred raised Bruce Wayne in the more recent reboots. That's still a guardian however. He might have been named the executor of the estate.
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 12:50:32 pm
Post by: LordBaal on October 26, 2015, 01:47:56 pm
And now I imagine what could have been wrong. They started to implement that kind of reproduction until it became the only way, ditching the old dirty ways. Obviously it was superior because you had perfect soldiers, medics, administrators, researchers, engineers, workers, pizza delivery guys, etc.... however down the road all you had was that. As regular horizontal-limbo-made kryptonians died out, all that was left was this perfect individuals bound to... nothing beyond their duties. There couldn't be any innovation, all its pre-set, that would mean that any new tech the automation researchers would develop would be explored and then ditched unless it helped the ways already established.
My guess, again as someone seeing the movie and "not knowing anything else" of the background material, is that all this happened on the stage of space exploration, and even I would dare to say that the "genetic superior" individuals went out their way to extinguish the regular kryptonians, eventually wiping out all possible colonies.
Post by: Neonivek on October 26, 2015, 07:35:02 pm
So this kid's mother basically lied to him and told him that he was deathly allergic to things that would keep him under control (Chocolate) and things she found distasteful.
So she said he was allergic to dogs because she noticed this house he was going to sleep over at had a dog and she was likely afraid of dogs.
Now they get a air filtering machine, kick Wishbone out of the room, and basically make the room dog free... Then the kid goes to sleep
When he awakens the filtering machine malfunctioned and broke a fuse and Wishbone slept with him the entire night.
Now he learns he wasn't allergic to dogs... and the mother apologizes
But no one is mad or embarrassed about what went down.... No one says "Hey, so... You thought I was deathly allergic to dogs, and you exposed me to something that we thought could kill me. Yeah I am never sleeping over at your house again"
Post by: Starver on October 27, 2015, 03:21:58 am
There are more Superman nitpicks but they're more about the franchise as a whole rather than any particular adaptation. e.g. if Kryptonians gain superpowers from yellow stars, why have they never exploited that fact in their history?I've always rationalised this (personally, with no actual reference to canon) that it was only the kryptonian cataclysm that enabled the "Krypyonian physiology benefits from yellow suns", the same as it made "kryptonian physiology is harmed by fragments of krypton".
Certainly, for the latter, it's generally the violent explosion of the planet (or the star it orbits, depending on the version) that converts the liveable Krypton into an anti-kryptonian substance (or more than one). But kal-el, whilst saved, could probably have been subject to a personally beneficial dose (that jor-el would have known about, and how it would affect him), whilst riding the wave of destruction, away on his escape vector.
(Doesn't explain what has, or hasn't, happened to the likes of Zod or Supergirl, having been in the phantom-zone or else taken a different vector of escape from the planet at a different time. Some handwavium may be needed.)
...again, that's my personal rationalisation. Differing versions of the myth will make or break elements of its validity, accordingly, I know.
Post by: Bohandas on October 27, 2015, 11:43:04 am
There are more Superman nitpicks but they're more about the franchise as a whole rather than any particular adaptation. e.g. if Kryptonians gain superpowers from yellow stars, why have they never exploited that fact in their history?The next time they reboot Superman what thay really should do is have it so that Krypton was destroyed by a botched attempt to reconfigure their sun that instead caused it to either go nova or go out
Post by: Dirst on October 27, 2015, 11:58:07 am
I don't think a retcon would go over any better with fans than simple "re-imagining" inconsistency.There are more Superman nitpicks but they're more about the franchise as a whole rather than any particular adaptation. e.g. if Kryptonians gain superpowers from yellow stars, why have they never exploited that fact in their history?The next time they reboot Superman what thay really should do is have it so that Krypton was destroyed by a botched attempt to reconfigure their sun that instead caused it to either go nova or go out
The one plot hole that the franchise did manage to avoid was handled very subtly in Superman Returns. "Why didn't Superman prevent 9/11? Seems like it'd hardly be a challenge." (I know that DC uses fictional cities, but the idea needed to be addressed.) Turns out he was lightyears away and lots of bad things happened during his absence.
Still didn't like that movie, but this aspect was well-executed.
Post by: Bohandas on October 27, 2015, 12:13:07 pm
I don't think a retcon would go over any better with fans than simple "re-imagining" inconsistency.There are more Superman nitpicks but they're more about the franchise as a whole rather than any particular adaptation. e.g. if Kryptonians gain superpowers from yellow stars, why have they never exploited that fact in their history?The next time they reboot Superman what thay really should do is have it so that Krypton was destroyed by a botched attempt to reconfigure their sun that instead caused it to either go nova or go out
The one plot hole that the franchise did manage to avoid was handled very subtly in Superman Returns. "Why didn't Superman prevent 9/11? Seems like it'd hardly be a challenge." (I know that DC uses fictional cities, but the idea needed to be addressed.) Turns out he was lightyears away and lots of bad things happened during his absence.
Still didn't like that movie, but this aspect was well-executed.
And anyway Bin Laden took the Watchmen approach and did the villainous monologue after the act of terror.
Post by: Bohandas on November 02, 2015, 12:49:25 am
-In Back to the Future 2, how did
-In Turbo the running gag wherein Chet becomes indignant after being mistaken for a girl ignores the fact that snails are hermaphrodites
Post by: Dirst on November 02, 2015, 01:41:48 am
-In Turbo the running gag wherein Chet becomes indignant after being mistaken for a girl ignores the fact that snails are hermaphroditesHave you heard of the movie Barnyard?
Post by: Reelya on November 02, 2015, 02:01:16 am
-In Back to the Future 2, how didfuture!Present! Biff manage to return to the original timeline after changing the past?
I remember discussing the movies with some friends and there are quite a few of these types of discrepancies. For example, how come there's no Marty that remembers growing up in the new household after the timeline changes in the first movie? You'd expect someone to have those memories.
Also, consider that the series doesn't seem to be a "multi-verse" idea. Marty affecting his own parents risks killing himself before he's born. So not only is it wrong that Biff got back to the old future, the old future itself should have ceased to exist due to the time shifting. So in one case, we have "no multiverse" yet in other cases it heavily implies there's a multiverse.
Overall, the movies conveniently ignore their own time travel rules or common sense in general whenever it would get in the way of a good story.
Post by: Reelya on November 02, 2015, 02:11:06 am
Also, when they go back in time to "biffworld" that makes no sense, since they should have gone back to the past of their current time-line, not a deviated time-line. Maybe you could justify the Biff part in movie #2 by saying that "time ripples" take some time to propagate forward, but that would contradict events in the other movies.
Post by: Starver on November 02, 2015, 08:03:14 am
Overall, the movies conveniently ignore their own time travel rules or common sense in general whenever it would get in the way of a good story.There are many different time-travel conventions that could be used, and BttF mixes and match with no logic, I absolutely agree. (Also a problem with the likes of Doctor Who, but with enough Handwavium to at least put a nod to it working.)
It seems to be a branching multiverse1, with possible branch-remerging2 (past the point of interference3), and while the Time-Traveller POV4 could explain some things, there might be a 'chronitron field'5 and single-instance protection6, whose feedback may or may not be responsible for the paradox-fade7.
I choose to believe that it's just a normal branching multiverse, at heart, with perhaps some degree of global inevitabilities (butterfly-effect proof at major levels of historical progression), but allowing small changes (the name of a particular ravine) and medium but personal-level ones (the prosperity of a given family) to take place within the context of a given branch's similarly-threading causality to that of a prior branch. A Marty McFly 'returning' from the past is not replacing his new-branch version, but that new-branch version himself departed (to create a differing new-new-branch?) in every new-branch where we stick around long enough to see extended effects. The Jennifer discovered sleeping on the porch, upon his return was not the one left in the newly de-Biffed/'recorrected' 1985 branch by the pre-Eastwooded Marty, but an alternate one who was left by an alternate Marty in an Eastwooded-branch by a Marty who had grown up in one or other Eastwood-derived branch (with its own Biffing/deBiffing branching effects, it appears) and had now perhaps departed to a double-Eastwooded branch (or perhaps, due to some weird memetic resonance, the equivalent real Clint Eastwood Jr had found himself named and/or popularised on the silver screen as something like "Clint Clayton", and was the inspiration for the Eastwooded-branch Marty in the part of history where he saved Clara Eastwood, or similar, from her legendary, if not purely mythical, tragic death).
The "fading away" part I can only ascribe to being a character-POV 'psychosis' as he thinks he sees his own future becoming untrue (in reality, leaving only a branch into which he could return as an immigrant time-travel 'returnee', having no 'original' there to soak up the administrative problem of him having a valid SSN/Driving Licence/etc. This internal worry spurs him on to do the best he can to respark his parents' alternate past, directing the branch into a much less worrying (and, in fact, 'improved') future that he can arrive in, just in time to see his improved-future self departing for... whenever.) That's the way it must work, to be in any way self-consistent.
(Personally, I'm firmly in the self-sustaining time-loop camp. What you go back and do, you've already been back and done, and 'paradoxes' are already part of your history (as misunderstood or mis-applied actions) before you leave for the past to create the circumstances you perhaps think you're going to change history with. i.e. it's Bootstraps all the way round, and the only stable timeline for the universe is ones in which the only time-loops present are self-perpetuating loops, or else the whole universe has to have a meta-timeout and be (not change to, but always be) a different timeline with a different conventional-time impetus to its timeloops that is consistent with being imparted with causes from the 'arriving' (into the past) part of the loop that support the self-same 'departing' (from the future) part of the loop. But that's just because I think it's a far neater way. Anyway, think "12 Monkeys".)
Meanwhile, at least it's not TimeCop!8
1 Arrive in the past and you create a new causality branch for you to interfere with.
2 Some degree of "inevitability protection" for macro-events that aren't totally changed, but also see below.
3 Maybe any fatalistic rebound to 'as near the original as you can still get' occurs the moment you leave again for the future?
4 The time-traveller takes their own memories with them.
5 The "Hey, wait, why I can now remember both timelines?" effect, in some versions of the genre.
6 Your arrival back where you originally started overwrites the you that never left (when you changed the past making it so that you wouldn't go back, although doesn't prevent co-existing (and usually spying on) your past (or alternate 'outatime') self
7 The one most annoying aspect to the films... Be, or be not. There is no 'fade away as things start to look hopeless for your future, and therefore current, existence'... In a replacing-timeline, you'd be there there so long as you are capable and/or destined to ensure your own existence. In a branching-timeline, you're from an alternate future from beyond the branch you created. In a remerging-branching-timeline, take your pick, but don't fade. Fading is a cause to other effects like someone saying "Hey, why is that dude fading?", so maybe there's a stable time-loop created, but that invokes other questions...
8 "Touch yourself [fnar fnar!] and both of you are destroyed"? You can have interactions between younger/traveller selves, even up-close-and-personal paradoxical knowledge-of-the-future conversations, but when atoms of one body touch the likely-as-not different atoms of another body (firstly, your skin renews quite rapidly; secondly, it doesn't seem to need to be even as precise as 'left-hand touches left-hand' such that there's a definite topological point that touches its other-version exact equivalent point; thirdly, atoms don't touch each other anyway) it suddenly all goes to pot? Time-Travel's ultimate recourse to hubris must work on DNA-matching/'soul'-based/temporal-biofeedback methodology. Also, it means that it only leaves cloning as a viable method for fulfilling the old hypothetical question of the old "if you have sex with yourself, is that technically masturbation?" chestnut...
Post by: Dirst on November 02, 2015, 11:31:41 pm
As for Doctor Who, the TARDIS is bigger on the inside precisely so that it can carry all of the necessary handwavium. The show will lull me into a false sense of consistency, then pull a space opera like The Rings of Akhaten out of its ass. "Strategic boo-boo" indeed.
Post by: Starver on November 03, 2015, 03:46:28 am
Starver, now I want to hear your explanation of 95ers: Echoes (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1824904) (aka 95ers:Timerunners on Amazon Prime).Well, I've not seen it (didn't know it even existed... even Wikipedia seems not to know that it exists!) so I can only guess, based on the IMDB plot summary.
It at least starts off a bit like Next (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_(2007_film)), with Nicholas Cage having a (mostly) limited 'look-ahead into all possible time-branches'. But then it involves weirdness. Perhaps Looper-like? (I haven't seen Looper, for some reason, so I'm only aware of the detail conveyed by its trailers, but I'm guessing.) Perhaps some 12 Monkeys business (although sounds less stable). Perhaps a bit of Millenium (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_(film)) (the film with the phrase "a force-infinity timequake"!).
Quote
As for Doctor Who, the TARDIS is bigger on the inside precisely so that it can carry all of the necessary handwavium.That and the entire universe having been rebooted (in-show, even, not 'as a show') at least once. Possibly twice, if not more, depending on interpretation...
The show shows enough bottle-universes, parallel universes, etc to allow for some of the remaining inconsistencies to be absorbed (even after the (not omniscient, but conveniently plot-scaled) temporal awareness of 'events' that Time Lords apparently possess)... But also the (planned) extinction (as in 'never even happened') of the whole multiverse, by the usual candidates, looks to indicate that even the deep, dark corners of quantum 'elsewhereness' (beyond physical veils normally not navigated to even with Tardii) aren't sufficient refuge from inconvenient cause-effect problems.
(One has to imagine that, outwith the 'metaverse', there's possibly a meta-metaverse. Aleph-prime to the Aleph-null original? Or roll with "its the plot" and try at least to enjoy the deliberate consistencies within the current story-arc...)
Post by: Dirst on November 03, 2015, 11:09:00 am
Of those, I'd only seen Millennium, which seems to have a strong tendency to revert to the "correct" timeline with the necessary action/reaction manifesting as a timequake. They never get around to explaining why the timequake doesn't affect all of the time between the manipulation and the time traveler's origin.Starver, now I want to hear your explanation of 95ers: Echoes (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1824904) (aka 95ers:Timerunners on Amazon Prime).Well, I've not seen it (didn't know it even existed... even Wikipedia seems not to know that it exists!) so I can only guess, based on the IMDB plot summary.
It at least starts off a bit like Next (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_(2007_film)), with Nicholas Cage having a (mostly) limited 'look-ahead into all possible time-branches'. But then it involves weirdness. Perhaps Looper-like? (I haven't seen Looper, for some reason, so I'm only aware of the detail conveyed by its trailers, but I'm guessing.) Perhaps some 12 Monkeys business (although sounds less stable). Perhaps a bit of Millenium (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_(film)) (the film with the phrase "a force-infinity timequake"!).
Echoes/Timerunners has both time machines as well as people with an inherent ability to replay the last seven seconds or so for a do-over. It also has just about every pathology you could imagine affecting a low-budget film. One of the IMDb reviewers put it, "I would also recommend it to film students as to what NOT to do" which I thought was too harsh.
I can deal with low-budget issues with subpar acting, dialog, pacing, etc. so long as the story is interesting and kinda-sorta makes sense. If we buy their explanation of time travel (both types), it still doesn't explain why (1) the ability to monitor past timelines isn't used routinely in warfare and espionage for perfect spying and (2) why the ability to monitor the past in "fast forward" seems to disappear whenever the people in the future are in a hurry due to events in their own time.
Post by: Starver on November 03, 2015, 05:49:59 pm
Of those, I'd only seen Millennium, which seems to have a strong tendency to revert to the "correct" timeline with the necessary action/reaction manifesting as a timequake. They never get around to explaining why the timequake doesn't affect all of the time between the manipulation and the time traveler's origin.There's often an assumption of 'meta-time', in change-the-past scenarios like that. The 'reshuffle of causality' has to ripple-through the intervening time (though people between the past-point and the future-point are rarely seen, to observe whether they 'feel' the ripple as it passes from one to the other). Or possibly its like a phased-array interference pattern, with minor oscillations being focussed upon the target (the point in the timeline responsible for causing the upset, i.e. in the vicinity of the contemporary time-machine 'gate') and only constructively interfering into a noticeable effect at that point.
Or imagine reversing the film of a droplet of water falling into a large body of liquid. Faint concentric ripples converge on a point, providing just enough energy (in just the right way) to sloosh a droplet of water up and out of the now-still surface.
Whatever, it's usually tied to (and/or handily duplicated in) the scene-switching in the film itself, between past and future, the past-protagonist might be walking around the family home and the present-protagnist(s) are wandering around the old-and-abandoned family home picking up signs of things he did. (PastP hides something behind some books, PresentP (on a whim) looks behind the books and finds the item.) Not unique to time-travel plots, of course. The guy in the past can be 'native' to the time and the present-day people are reviewing prior events as a 'cold case', for some reason.
However meta-time can occur when (say) a vase is knocked over in the Past. It wasn't knocked over in the present, but now it is, it can be seen. 'Time ripples' (i.e. minor versions of a time-quake) might happen. Present-day observers may or may not notice the effect (might depend on their real(meta)time link with the time-traveller), or notice that other (unlinked) people aren't noticing, even though things like their clothes are changing, newspaper headlines are morphing and ruined buildings become rebuilt and built buildings become ruined, according to the consequence of the changes.
(A related literary example, Terry Pratchett's 'Mort', the titular character is 'out of reality' enough to notice that the 'wrong trouserleg of time' featuring someone's survival from assassination is being replaced by the 'right trouserleg' where she didn't. Whilst inside the Queen's Head tavern the 'interface' moves through it. Nothing much observably changes at first (slight clothing changes) but going out through the door he discovers that the tavern he is in is now called the Duke's Head. Nobody else notices (they are all living this other reality). They're far more disturbed that he went through the door, but that's something else. ;) )
As a convenient convention, it is often taken that as realtime in the past passes for the person in the past (from the moment he arrives), similar realtime in the present passes (since he departed) before such changes to reality occur. Sometimes this is because the doorway-to-the-past is two way, and the time in the past you spend through the door is the same time that you are not present in the present, because you're through the door. Other times it's 'rule of plot', at best.
Whichever way, you could perhaps imagine it as a stack of parallel universe 'sheets', offset in the time dimension so that you travel 'n' universes over sideways (through the stack) in your time-jump and this takes you to the same-place-but-'m'-hours-earlier location in a partner universe, where m is proportional to n. In your own universe's past (by 'm' hours) the 'n'-in-the-future slice's time-traveller version of yourself might have arrived. Or maybe not, if (in line with your own actions, in the 'now' now, across whatever slices you travel) your actions in the n-sideways universe would in turn prevent the n-sideways, m-in-the-future version of yourself from travelling to the equivalent 2n-sideways point. (If this version is stopped, then the 2n-sideways 2m-in-the-future version of yourself will in turn still travel to the 3m-sideways 'verse, right. Just like you were able to do and -2n;-2m occured, stopping the -n;-m version that might have stopped your 0n;0m actions. Simple!) Whether or not the intervening layers in the 'stack' have their own array of actors/inactors doing similar things to interfere with each other at n±k equivalent positions throughout the stack.
I forget now how the rest of the series dealt with such paradox (I think it was more 12 Monkeys... more about that shortly), but the final episode of Goodnight Sweetheart (http://Goodnight_Sweetheart_(TV_series)) (man finds two-way temporal doorway back from 1990s London to the Blitz-era city) is bookended by the redecoration of a flat bought by the man for his WW2 use. When... something happens... he puts a message behind new wallpaper that he puts up, back in that time, just in time to be revealed by the contemporary redecorator of the '90s when he removes the very same 50-year-old wallpaper. If the redecoration had happened prior to this point, would the message have been there?
Doctor Who's episode of 'blink' has something similar, driven by multiple instances of time-loops. The DVD messages existed before the person who ensured that they were there found themselves in the position of being able to start to prepare them, and the answers to the questions existed 'before' the questions themselves were asked (and enough details taken to allow the asked questions to be responded to), but then we've already touched Doctor Who's... flexibility... with such things. As an example, in a pre-restart series... 3rd or 4th Doctor..? ...there was a case where Doctor and companion are dealing with a pre-'now' invasion of Earth and the companion states that obviously the invasion failed, because they know Earth is unscathed... one quick (surprisingly consistent and unmisdirected) trip back to the present in the Tardis and the doctor shows the 'ruined now' of Earth, that will happen to the past they have just left, and so they return to the past (again, the Tardis's steering seems surprisingly glitch-free) to thwart the invasion and create the 'non-ruined now' again. (Yes, probably absorbed by the same thing that the Master tapped into his captive-Tardis paradox-device to allow the Tochlafane to subjugate Humanity, despite the eventual problems involved in that being possible... which, as it turns out, doesn't turn out...)
Anyway, as you apparently haven't seen it, my reference to 12 Monkeys is regarding its stable time-loop (assuming you don't explain it away as something entirely different). As a young boy, the protagonist witnesses something. Limited information about the 12 Monkeys comes from some time between the present and the future. In the future, the protagonist is tasked to find out what actually happened via time-travel. Back in the past, he features (has already featured) in the event he witnessed as the young boy and is instrumental in the generation of the original information about the 12 Monkeys. To say much more would be a spoiler beyond the level I'm prepared to go.
Personally, I like the 12 Monkeys plot (done well, you don't even need to be fooled into thinking it won't be one, because there's still things to discover!), insofar as it fits my world-view of how time-loops work. However, I'm equally happy with (good) flip-flopping timeline plots, branch-generation plots, etc, if they measure their resilience and consistency well to how hard/soft their intrinsic 'background science' is.
Thus, Bill And Ted's Bogus Journey ("...we just need to remember to come back and put the key where we can find it... ah, here it is...") is a good treatment of 'soft' time-loops, if a bit deus-ex, but also Interstellar... (in ways I won't describe, because it's maybe still on some people's to-watch lists).
The classic (original?) Time Travel/Butterfly Effect story "A Sound of Thunder" by Ray Bradbury works for time-branching/redoing, exactly enough for the setting, and then of course HG Wells's own "The Time Machine" appears to avoid such problems by the sheer scale of time, ditto A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court (in most variations). There's a short story equivalent (which I wouldn't nowknow the name of, or how to find) which has a female 'merlin' from the future looking for a 'likely lad' to create a myth around with her own technologically-inspired 'sword in a stone' (anvil) setup (a tidally-powered waterwheel sending crude electricity through crude wires into a crude electromagnet which is the crude mechanism behind preventing anyone 'unworthy' from drawing the sword... unless she cuts the power, for the person she selects), and that hints at the same bootstrapping mechanism as the "...and how do we know he isn't the inventor of transparent aluminum?" part of Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.
The Narnia series handles time-differences by (as well as a degree of overseeing omniscience/omnipotence by Aslan, no doubt) having separate worlds, anyway, with conveniently differing flows of time, and, besides, it's magic and mystical! ;)
Post by: Dirst on November 03, 2015, 06:50:41 pm
If it helps, eons ago I read thru the GM materials for the Doctor Who role-playing game, and they described the fluidity of time conspiring to make sure important events occur as remembered by Gallifrey's history (which was is in our distant future). Basically the book said to thwart anything clever and unexpected done by the players >:(
Now I'm trying to remember why no one remembers the Cyberking in Victorian London. Or the Tyranasaur. Maybe I'm just not a Time Sensitive.
Post by: Starver on November 03, 2015, 07:12:53 pm
Now I'm trying to remember why no one remembers the Cyberking in Victorian London. Or the Tyranasaur. Maybe I'm just not a Time Sensitive.Whether or not it's the reasoning, shortly after the cyberking (from the series POV) was switch to Doctor 11, and his "cracks in the universe" that led up to the major "universal reboot" of The Big Bang. All kinds of things can have been 'tidied away' during this process.
The tyrannosaur (the Deep Breath one, I assume?) might have been sufficiently covered over/shushed up by the efforts of the Paternoster Gang, or a fledgling version of whatever Torchwood/Unit-type organisations occur at that point in London's history.
(Anyway, everyone knows that London's weird... ;) )
Post by: Bohandas on November 03, 2015, 07:36:50 pm
Now I'm trying to remember why no one remembers the Cyberking in Victorian London. Or the Tyranasaur. Maybe I'm just not a Time Sensitive.Whether or not it's the reasoning, shortly after the cyberking (from the series POV) was switch to Doctor 11, and his "cracks in the universe" that led up to the major "universal reboot" of The Big Bang. All kinds of things can have been 'tidied away' during this process.
Isb't that also the premise of the Discworld novel Thief of Time
Post by: Starver on November 03, 2015, 08:21:13 pm
YesNo.Now I'm trying to remember why no one remembers the Cyberking in Victorian London. Or the Tyranasaur. Maybe I'm just not a Time Sensitive.Whether or not it's the reasoning, shortly after the cyberking (from the series POV) was switch to Doctor 11, and his "cracks in the universe" that led up to the major "universal reboot" of The Big Bang. All kinds of things can have been 'tidied away' during this process.
Isb't that also the premise of the Discworld novel Thief of Time
Canon has it that the events in ToT is the second time such a thing has (almost?) happened. Canon also usefully suggests that any previous problems with continuity-of-canon is now easily explained because of these 'events'. ;)
(For example, how come the Dysc Theatre is "the first of its kind" in Elizabethan-style 'modern'1 Ankh-Morpork, prior to this companies of actors being of the peripatetic variety without any form of permanent theatre, and yet it sits in the shadow of the Opera House, a centuries-old building an analogue of the French Second Empire architecture. Simple: It's a result of a hasty repairing of time by the History Monks, after... the incident. Even though we first saw both before the incident. ;) )
As such, it doesn't so much 'tidy away' anachronisms, as possibly explain them. The tidying away is done by the human psyche, with the same mechanism that means that living people tend to ignore Death, or reinvent Him as someone that they can better handle during interactions with Him, unless absolutely forced to concentrate on his realer-than-real reality.
OTOH, I still can rationalise the Patrician of TCOM as actually being Vetinari (even though Word Of God has said that it actually wasn't, and may not even have been the same continuity, being written by a less experienced author than the one that wrote the later books), and all without necessitating the involvement of The Men In Saffron.
1 By Disc standards.
Post by: Culise on November 03, 2015, 08:27:37 pm
OTOH, I still can rationalise the Patrician of TCOM as actually being Vetinari (even though Word Of God has said that it actually wasn't, and may not even have been the same continuity, being written by a less experienced author than the one that wrote the later books), and all without necessitating the involvement of The Men In Saffron.I thought WOG was the exact opposite, that the Patrician of the early books was indeed Vetinari as "written by a less experienced author" (to borrow Pratchett's own words). It's usually the fanbase that tries to identify him with Snapcase or some other Patrician between Snapcase and Vetinari. That is, you're 100% correct in your rationalization. Did this end up being reversed at some point?
1 By Disc standards.
Post by: Starver on November 03, 2015, 09:34:10 pm
I thought WOG was the exact opposite, that the Patrician of the early books was indeed Vetinari as "written by a less experienced author" (to borrow Pratchett's own words). It's usually the fanbase that tries to identify him with Snapcase or some other Patrician between Snapcase and Vetinari. That is, you're 100% correct in your rationalization. Did this end up being reversed at some point?It might depend on the WOG interview concerned. I've been a Pratchett fan (...which I am, if you haven't gathered...) for a long time, and there's been a lot of development of opinion along the way... ;)
For the record, my basic theory (not that it's a nitpick that ruins a movie, but... I'm now into this conversation quite deep), in light of all we currently know, is...
Spoiler: long! (click to show/hide)
Post by: LordBaal on November 04, 2015, 10:00:12 am
It ditch away all those alternate lines and multiverses and you simply end up with a single, unchangeable line.
All You Zombies is, ditching aside the fact that the protagonist works of an agency that prevent changes on time, an excellent work of self-contained consequences of time travel, but perhaps is "too much self-contained"
Post by: Bohandas on November 05, 2015, 09:51:05 am
There's also the issue that the protagonists apparently perceive the Catholic Church as having significant temporal power, despite the action taking place hundreds of years after the end of the middle-ages.
Post by: Bohandas on November 06, 2015, 01:22:54 am
I mean, I suppose the idea of a world where everybody is a stupid panicky reactionary luddite with the except for three people out of the entire population is a frightening idea in theory, but this is clearly not the intended source of the supposed horror and as such is not played to sufficient effect to be truly frightening.
There's the grave robbing aspect, but grave robbing isn't frightening, it's merely disgusting and insulting to the deceased. It's like if somebody took a dump in my mailbox; I'd be offended and disgusted, but it wouldn't frighten me.
The creature does kill a small number of people, but one of them is in self defense, and the others - in addition to being obvious accidents - are more in the vein of slapstick than horror
Post by: LordBaal on November 06, 2015, 08:03:24 am
Post by: Dirst on November 06, 2015, 09:59:59 am
Putting things into modern terms, Frankenstein's monster is horror movie fare because "moving corpse" is right in the middle of the Uncanny Valley. And this isn't just a moving corpse, it's the sewn-together collage of different corpse pieces.
My nitpick about the book is its pacing. When Mary Shelley chooses between "showing" and "telling" something, she picks the wrong one pretty much 100% of the time.
Post by: LordBaal on November 06, 2015, 10:09:11 am
Post by: Dirst on November 06, 2015, 11:02:47 am
Cue to open a Nitpicks that Ruined Books thread.Every movie adaptation goes over the top with special effects as creature is animated, usually with the pull of an oversized Frankenstein Switch™. But this is what you see in the book:
Quote from: Mary Shelley
It was on a dreary night of November that I beheld the accomplishment of my toils. With an anxiety that almost amounted to agony, I collected the instruments of life around me, that I might infuse a spark of being into the lifeless thing that lay at my feet. It was already one in the morning; the rain pattered dismally against the panes, and my candle was nearly burnt out, when, by the glimmer of the half-extinguished light, I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open; it breathed hard, and a convulsive motion agitated its limbs.
After two long, whiny paragraphs of how terrible this was we get a brief primer on the Uncanny Valley:
Quote from: Mary Shelley
Oh! no mortal could support the horror of that countenance. A mummy again endued with animation could not be so hideous as that wretch. I had gazed on him while unfinished; he was ugly then; but when those muscles and joints were rendered capable of motion, it became a thing such as even Dante could not have conceived.
And that's pretty much it. The "world will never be the same" scene, and the motivation for the following 19 chapters are left to the reader's imagination.
Post by: Neonivek on November 06, 2015, 04:15:12 pm
In that I didn't know if the doctor is meant to be in the right about basically destroying all hopes the monster ever had... or if he is meant to be the real villain and a unreliable narrator.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 06, 2015, 05:04:24 pm
The Da Vinci Code depicts a massive global conspiracy to protect secrets that I can't imagine more than a handful of people in the entire world caring about. I can see in my mind's eye a news report doing a 30 second report on how some higher ups in the catholic heirarchy believe that Jesus had a kid or that such and such person may be his descendant, or that they equate the holy grail with Mary Magdaline, and I can see the person watching this news report flipping to a different channel before it's over.You forgot illerminatiiiii
There's also the issue that the protagonists apparently perceive the Catholic Church as having significant temporal power, despite the action taking place hundreds of years after the end of the middle-ages.
And Catholic antimatter bomb
CATHOLIC ANTIMATTER BOMB
Post by: Starver on November 06, 2015, 05:57:04 pm
CATHOLIC ANTIMATTER BOMBEveryone is very careful to ensure that the Pope doesn't touch the Anti-Pope....
Post by: Rolan7 on November 06, 2015, 06:08:47 pm
Post by: Bohandas on November 06, 2015, 08:15:50 pm
The Da Vinci Code depicts a massive global conspiracy to protect secrets that I can't imagine more than a handful of people in the entire world caring about. I can see in my mind's eye a news report doing a 30 second report on how some higher ups in the catholic heirarchy believe that Jesus had a kid or that such and such person may be his descendant, or that they equate the holy grail with Mary Magdaline, and I can see the person watching this news report flipping to a different channel before it's over.You forgot illerminatiiiii
There's also the issue that the protagonists apparently perceive the Catholic Church as having significant temporal power, despite the action taking place hundreds of years after the end of the middle-ages.
And Catholic antimatter bomb
CATHOLIC ANTIMATTER BOMB
That was from the sequel
Post by: Neonivek on November 06, 2015, 08:20:12 pm
Post by: Bohandas on November 06, 2015, 08:23:39 pm
So Monty Python is in canon with the Da Vinci Code the whole time? Wow
I assume you're referring to the fact that the gtail was found in the posession of french people we encountered at the beginning of the film and that most of the characters get arrested in the end?
Post by: Neonivek on November 06, 2015, 08:38:57 pm
So Monty Python is in canon with the Da Vinci Code the whole time? Wow
I assume you're referring to the fact that the gtail was found in the posession of french people we encountered at the beginning of the film and that most of the characters get arrested in the end?
And the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch.
Post by: Reelya on November 11, 2015, 07:16:22 am
"The Aztec calender was metric, so I'm guessing the pyramid reconfigures every ten minutes".
^ It's like one of those "find 10 things wrong with this picture" puzzles.
1. The aztec calender wasn't "metric"
2. there's no such thing as a "metric calender"
3. maybe you meant "base-10". But the Aztec calender wasn't that either.
4. why would a metric calender tell you anything about time of day.
5. hours and minutes aren't metric
6. they aren't base-10 either
7. the aztecs didn't have clocks.
8. we only started using steady 24 hour time in the medieval period.
9. the guy was meant to be an expert on archaelogy.
10. 10 minutes is 1/144th of a day. Which is as far away from metric as you can get. It's "100" in base 12 notation.
Post by: Culise on November 11, 2015, 08:52:53 am
2. there's no such thing as a "metric calender"Fun fact: there was a "metric calendar," after a fashion. Perhaps you're thinking of a pure base-ten or decimal calendar when you think of the idea of a "metric calendar" due to the emphasis on "ten minutes" in AVP, but metricization efforts in Revolutionary France included a Republican Calendar with twelve months of thirty days each (divided into three decades of ten days), along with 5-6 complementary days because the solar year isn't quite so conveniently tied to the solar day. It proved to be only marginally more popular than the decimalization of time, however, and was abolished by Napoleon.
That said, saying the Aztecs had a metric calendar is like saying the ancient Romans had a Gregorian calendar; it's just so temporally displaced that it's hilarious.
Post by: USEC_OFFICER on November 11, 2015, 09:00:00 am
2. there's no such thing as a "metric calender"
Checkmate, Catholi- (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Republican_Calendar)
Oh. Ninja'd. But yeah, a metric calendar did kinda exist and was created as part of the revolution's decimalization of everything.
Also, according to some quick research, the Aztec calendar was based on a series of 20-day months. So it wasn't even metric or decimal to begin with, which makes that sentence extra stupid.
Post by: Rolan7 on November 11, 2015, 09:41:34 am
Nitpick from the AVP movie I'm watching right now:Well they predicted the end of the world, so maybe they predicted the Gregorian calendar!
"The Aztec calender was metric, so I'm guessing the pyramid reconfigures every ten minutes".
^ It's like one of those "find 10 things wrong with this picture" puzzles.
1. The aztec calender wasn't "metric"
2. there's no such thing as a "metric calender"
3. maybe you meant "base-10". But the Aztec calender wasn't that either.
4. why would a metric calender tell you anything about time of day.
5. hours and minutes aren't metric
6. they aren't base-10 either
7. the aztecs didn't have clocks.
8. we only started using steady 24 hour time in the medieval period.
9. the guy was meant to be an expert on archaelogy.
10. 10 minutes is 1/144th of a day. Which is as far away from metric as you can get. It's "100" in base 12 notation.
(mayans == aztecs rite? :P)
Post by: Neonivek on November 11, 2015, 01:12:33 pm
Post by: Reelya on November 11, 2015, 04:38:52 pm
Overall we kinds dropped the ball by not settling on factors of 12. Much better than 10.
Post by: Bohandas on November 11, 2015, 06:37:09 pm
The weird thing is that I used to enjoy the show back when it was originally on, but in retrospect I can't figure out why
Post by: Jopax on November 11, 2015, 07:27:57 pm
Post by: Reelya on November 13, 2015, 09:30:53 am
Pro-tip: do not research the Willhelm scream if you don't like your suspension of disbelief to be challenged. Once you're aware of these stock sound effects everyone uses, you start noticing them all the time, which can slightly ruin enjoying the moment. I think the frequency of this particular scream has gone beyond just using stock sound effects and has become somewhat of a hollywood in-joke.
Post by: Dirst on November 13, 2015, 09:34:29 am
Not really a nitpick, but I rented a bunch of DVDs this week and two of them had the Willhelm Scream in them. The Hobbit has a Wilhelm-screaming goblin in Moria, and I'm watching Aeon Flux right now and there's a Willhelm-screaming guard. Sound editors especially like this scream when someone falls or is flung off a high place, like off a bridge or a ledge.You mean like the two or three laugh tracks used during the entire run of Happy Days? I was a little kid and I noticed it.
Pro-tip: do not research the Willhelm scream if you don't like your suspension of disbelief to be challenged. Once you're aware of these stock sound effects everyone uses, you start noticing them all the time, which can slightly ruin enjoying the moment.
Edit: To clarify, this was in re-runs. I'm older than most around here, but not quite that ancient.
Post by: Reelya on November 13, 2015, 09:49:44 am
You mean like the two or three laugh tracks used during the entire run of Happy Days? I was a little kid and I noticed it.You do know that the Cunninghams have the mummified corpse of Richie's older brother stashed in the attic, right? He went upstairs in one episode, then was never seen or mentioned again.
Edit: To clarify, this was in re-runs. I'm older than most around here, but not quite that ancient.
Post by: Dirst on November 13, 2015, 10:06:53 am
To be fair, he was mentioned again. And was even allegedly on the other end of a few phone calls. But you are correct that the actor was never brought back.You mean like the two or three laugh tracks used during the entire run of Happy Days? I was a little kid and I noticed it.You do know that the Cunninghams have the mummified corpse of Richie's older brother stashed in the attic, right? He went upstairs in one episode, then was never seen or mentioned again.
Edit: To clarify, this was in re-runs. I'm older than most around here, but not quite that ancient.
To me, though, it will always be the show that invented jumping the shark.
Post by: scriver on November 13, 2015, 10:33:13 am
Post by: Bohandas on November 13, 2015, 02:14:01 pm
Not really a nitpick, but I rented a bunch of DVDs this week and two of them had the Willhelm Scream in them. The Hobbit has a Wilhelm-screaming goblin in Moria, and I'm watching Aeon Flux right now and there's a Willhelm-screaming guard. Sound editors especially like this scream when someone falls or is flung off a high place, like off a bridge or a ledge.You mean like the two or three laugh tracks used during the entire run of Happy Days? I was a little kid and I noticed it.
Pro-tip: do not research the Willhelm scream if you don't like your suspension of disbelief to be challenged. Once you're aware of these stock sound effects everyone uses, you start noticing them all the time, which can slightly ruin enjoying the moment.
Edit: To clarify, this was in re-runs. I'm older than most around here, but not quite that ancient.
If done right though, that kind of thing can positively enhance a comedy by creating a subtle running gag. Spongebob comes to mind with it's running gag of every time there's any sort of altercation or accident or disaster there's the same clip of someone yelling "My leg" or on Aqua Teen Hunger Force where just about every time something gts set on fire it's the same stock footage of a campfire
Post by: Bohandas on November 19, 2015, 12:26:07 am
EDIT:
Also, have you ever encountered something in a movie where it could either be a deliberate callback to something earlier in the film or series or a weird and careless oversight, and it's totally unclear which is which. For example, in Austin Powers II Scott Evil suggests that his father should use his time machine to "go back and kill Austin Powers when he's sitting on the toilet or something", and in the first film there was a scene where Austin was attacked in a bathroom stall, and I cannot for the life of me tell whether Scott's line was meant to be some kind of weird callback to a scene in the first film that had nothing to do with that character, or if it was just a result of the writers having a limited repertoire of gags.
(intentional or not though my headcanon for the series is that after inheriting the time machine in the third film Scott sends the assassin back to try to kill Austin Powers in the first film)
Post by: Neonivek on November 19, 2015, 12:35:36 am
Sequel foreshadowing that doesn't pan out is always disappointing. Like they when they set up for a sequel at the end of the film and then the sequel never gets made.
It is kind of worse when the Sequel Foreshadowing is better then the actual movie you got.
Like Jem and the Holograms movie (don't watch it is terrible! and dishonest to the cartoon) for example has the Misfits show up at the end sequel bait...
And it is KESHA! Pizzazz is being played by Kesha! Is there anything more perfect? Why wasn't that our movie?
Post by: Reelya on November 19, 2015, 06:39:45 am
Started Starship Troopers II because, I think, how bad could it be? Well I got my answer, really fucking bad. The acting is amazingly bad, the special effects are utter shit and it looks worse than a low-budget TV action show. There's supposed to be a huge bug attack going on but most of the scene is close-up head shots of talking marines who don't really seem all that to stressed out. The directing and cinematography is so shite it's almost like it's created a new level of shite. And that's just for the big opening battle scene. I dread to think how bad the rest of this movie is going to be. But I'll gonna get my $1 worth goddamit. The nitpick is: this entire movie and I can already tell that within a couple of minutes into the thing.
Post by: Arx on November 19, 2015, 06:42:44 am
Post by: Reelya on November 19, 2015, 06:55:44 am
Post by: Dirst on November 19, 2015, 07:57:00 am
Started Starship Troopers II because, I think, how bad could it be?I remember after seeing Robot Jox thinking that the sequel Robot Wars couldn't possibly be worse.
Within the first five seconds I knew I was wrong.
Post by: Reelya on November 19, 2015, 08:04:54 am
Robot Jox: 5.3
Robot Wars 4.0
Starship Troopers 1: 7.2.
Starship Troopers 2: 3.5
Well, it had a really low budget and mostly terrible actors. But the main story that developed in the movie involves a whole lot of gore, and was actually different from the first movie. I can sort of see now that they skimped on the effects for standard bug attacks to focus on this other story rather than just repeat the first film. Works ok as a cheap gory action horror, but unfortunately all the humor from the first film is missing, except for a couple of recycled movie #1 jokes at the start and end.
Post by: Starver on November 19, 2015, 09:29:07 am
imdb ratings:That made me think to check...
Robot Jox: 5.3
Robot Wars 4.0
Starship Troopers 1: 7.2.
Starship Troopers 2: 3.5
1986: Highlander (1986): 7.2
1991: Highlander II ('The Quickening'): 4.0 (not quite the SsT level of drop, for a movie that is famously ignored in canon!)
1994: Highlander III ('The Magician'/'Final Dimension): 4.3 (surprisingly low, for the 'rebound one that isn't ignored')
2000: Highlander IV ('Endgame'): 4.5 (still struggling!)
2007: Highlander ('The Source'): 3.1 (uh oh!)
Also, the TV series...es:
1992: Highlander: 7.3 (good!)
1998: Highlander: The Raven: 5.2 (not so good)
...more...
1978: Superman: 7.3
1980: Superman II: 6.8
1983: Superman III: 4.9
1987: Superman IV: 3.7 - no wonder there was no V. Or was there?
2006: Superman Returns: 6.1 Reboot v1
2013: Man Of Steel: 7.2 Reboot v2
(1966: Star Trek TOS: 8.4) * putting TV series in ()s, for clarity *
(1973: Star Trek TAS: 7.7)
1979: Star Trek: The Motion Picture: 6.4 (odd number, low expectation, and that's the last time I use the official movie title)
1982: Star Trek II: Kaaahhhhhhnnnnnnn!!!: 7.7 (even number, high expectation)
1984: Star Trek III: Doctor/Spock: 6.6 (odd number low)
1986: Star Trek IV: Whales!: 7.3 (even number high!)
1989: Star Trek V: God!: 5.4 (odd, low)
1991: Star Trek VI: Those aren't his knees!: 7.2 (even, high)
(1987: Star Trek TNG: 8.7)
(1993: Star Trek DS9: 7.9)
1994: Star Trek (7): That Nexus Thing: 6.6 (un-numbered but odd and low)
(1995: Star Trek Voy: 7.7)
1998: Star Trek (8): Conspiracies: 6.4 (un-numbered, but broken the patter)
(2000: Star Trek Hidden Frontier: 5.6)
(2001: Star Trek Ent: 7.5 - good! Expected worse, but I quite liked it...)
1995: Star Trek (9): The Borg Queen: 7.6 (should be low... unless we just forget Insurrection @ #8)
2002: Star Trek (10): Romulans!: 6.4 (yes, forget Insurrection. Or Generations, but at least they redid that ending.)
(2007: Star Trek Odyssey: 6.3)
2009: Star Trek: The Reboot: 8.0
(2012: Star Trek Genesis: 6.7 - ??? what? when?)
(2013: Star Trek Continues: 7.7 - ??? again, what?)
(2014: Star Trek Begins: ?? - looks like nobody has heard of this one...)
2014: sTAR tREK: tHE rEBOOT ii: 7.8
(2015: Star Trek Renegades: 5.0 - but I've not seen this, so I don't know how fair it is...)
1979: Mad Max: 7.0
1981: Mad Max 2: 7.6
1985: Mad Max 3: 6.2
2015: Mad Max Reboot: 8.2
1968: The Love Bug: 6.4
1974: Herbie Rides Again: 5.6
1977: Herbie Goes to Monte Carlo: 5.5
1980: Herbie Goes Bananas 4.8
1997: The Love Bug: 5.2
2005: Herbie: Fully Loaded: 4.7
...that should do for now...
Post by: Bohandas on November 26, 2015, 04:11:18 pm
Post by: Neonivek on December 03, 2015, 06:31:21 pm
Big Hero Six and Hotel Transylvania 2 and both for their ending
----
Big Hero Six
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hotel Transylvania 2
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Greiger on December 03, 2015, 11:09:10 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Neonivek on December 03, 2015, 11:25:54 pm
Pixels:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Don't worry because
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dirst on December 04, 2015, 12:18:51 pm
It makes sense that aliens would have ethnic groups, but it defies probability that the skin-eye-hair clusters would be the same as Earthlings'. Tuvok downright broke suspension of disbelief. The Andorians were done well, but that's a lone exception in a long list of lazy efforts.
Specific to Defiance, the Ilrathients are the obvious culprit here. The Castithans are also a crappy FFS design, but they are all painted the same color regardless of the actor's ethnicity, and the makeup itself is pretty impressive. They show Castithans getting wet, dirty, bruised, bloodied, etc. while maintaining that every-so-slightly-pink complexion. The plot-before-any-plausible-science conceit is that Ilrathients and Castithans can both interbreed with humans unaided (haven't seen any evidence that they can interbreed with each other, but the two don't exactly get along).
Post by: LordBaal on December 04, 2015, 12:31:16 pm
When I said aided it might be some freakish experiment or something, or when is established that both species come from the same one but thousands of years of separation and quick morphologic phenotypes changes have made them look different. IE Dogs have this capacity to breed phenotypical differences really darn quickly. It would be reasonable that dogs separated from a hundred or thousand years in different planets would look really different but could be capable of interbreeding relatively unaided.
In Star Wars EU material the Duros are said to be among the first "contemporary" species to have reached for the stars and colonized planets thousands of years ago, this led to subspecies like the race of the guys from the Trade Federation. The humans also had this happened to them and so on....
Startrek has this as excuse, stargate also have something along those lines.
Lately I can't stand any show that try to pass "true" aliens as simple people with different skin colour and rubber forehead. Convergent evolution is something that can happen yes, but c'mon, the exact same kind of features in the exact same places with only a few addons? This is something Halo have made really good, granted it started as a game so they had an advantage, but still.
Sadly this kind of thing will remain even after CGI tech have advanced, people simply relate better to humans than to a thirty eyed turtle with a starfish for head and the bottom part of a snail.
Post by: Shazbot on December 04, 2015, 12:41:28 pm
Post by: wierd on December 04, 2015, 12:42:49 pm
There are many body plan types besides bipedal hominid that would lend themselves well to a technologically advanced civilization-- Say, a hexapoid species, with a long. flat body plan. (Four legs, 2 grasping limbs). They could theoretically run faster than a biped, would have the advantage of being able to lean up for vision, and would have limbs free for technological use.
Hollywood is just afraid of the Uncanny Valley in story telling. The role of "The other" is meant to illustrate something about humanity, and for some strange reason, there is this unnatural fixation in today's media for everything to be an excuse for SexyTime. No, serving on an alien starship for a time to book passage does NOT mean that you or they are going to find the idea of SexyTime appealing. Remember, bipedal humans look just as damned ugly as hell as 6 limbed aliens with weasel like gait patterns (and who knows how many eyes, or what all kinds of sensory organs) is going to be to humans. Hell, they might be so biochemically alien that even ATTEMPTING SexyTime can cause a severe allergic reaction for both participants--- Because that is what the damn reality of that kind of situation would be. Instead of focusing on how freaking hard it would be to move about in a ship that has low ceilings bcause of the alien's body plan (Basically going on all fours all over the place, because the ship FORCES you to just to get around) or some other practical matter, they make every damned thing into an excuse for having the SexyTime scene between the niave/handsome progtagonist, and the charming/exotic alien love interest.
Gag me with a salad serving spoon.
Post by: Neonivek on December 04, 2015, 12:43:28 pm
Post by: LordBaal on December 04, 2015, 12:43:50 pm
Just repeat to yourself "Its just a show, I should really just relax."(http://decapolis.com/files/2011/08/arnold_angry-400x224.jpeg)
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Post by: Neonivek on December 04, 2015, 12:45:59 pm
"Stop feeling your emotions, feel mine instead!"
MAYBE people take their entertainment seriously... because part of the point is to take it seriously.
Just this non-stop "Stop having fun guys!"
Post by: Dirst on December 04, 2015, 12:46:39 pm
Sadly this kind of thing will remain even after CGI tech have advanced, people simply relate better to humans than to a thirty eyed turtle with a starfish for head and the bottom part of a snail.People could relate just fine with Yoda and Toothless. Yes, there will be some constraints on how facial expressions work to keep things accessible, but I'd rather see some artistic experimentation than stick with FFS.
But like I said I understand why FFS is there. My problem is with matching the heavy makeup to the actor rather than doing something alien-looking for ethnic groups. I recall that there was some variation among the Narn of Babylon 5 and the Newcomers of Alien Nation, but in both cases dealt with the size and frequency of their spots and might have been simple individual variation.
Post by: wierd on December 04, 2015, 12:49:56 pm
Some seemed mildly mentally retarded, but were VERY good social workers, etc.
(But Alien Nation suffered the "Lets have alien-human SexyTime!" problem, as did Babylon 5.-- Hey other humans, ProTip--- There are all kinds of rewarding relationships people can have that do not involve sexual feelings or acts. Contact with alien body fluids that cause poison ivy like allergic reactions, tends to make the idea of sex, even with protection, a very unpleasant thought-- and truly alien physiologies are likely to have that kind of effect on each other. Differences in reproductive strategy might also make this a non-starter-- Like say, having a detachable, spike encrusted penis that blocks off the reproductive tract of the female after copulation, for instance. It works for THEM, but-- really? Still gonna trying hitting that? For real?)
Post by: Dirst on December 04, 2015, 12:56:56 pm
(But Alien Nation suffered the "Lets have alien-human SexyTime!" problem, as did Babylon 5.)Alien Nation did allude to people getting injured from "doing it wrong," but the fact that it's possible at all (especially since Newcomers have three genders) is just plain dumb.
I only recall one scene of interspecies SexyTime in Babylon 5, and neither was human. It was a marsupial Narn and a mammalian Centauri, and in the context of the show those two getting together was downright hilarious.
Post by: LordBaal on December 04, 2015, 12:57:45 pm
Both of them had more or less the same plan that we do, two eyes, a nose between, a mouth below...Sadly this kind of thing will remain even after CGI tech have advanced, people simply relate better to humans than to a thirty eyed turtle with a starfish for head and the bottom part of a snail.People could relate just fine with Yoda and Toothless. Yes, there will be some constraints on how facial expressions work to keep things accessible,
(http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/0/09/Talz_AA.JPG/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/180?cb=20090201001333)(http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/7/74/Tendau_Bendon_%28Ithorian%29.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20080816183256)
This would be some at least more believable aliens, where convergent evolution have made them bipeds and with two upper limbs, that's it. Their faces are not human or even human like faces, they are truly alien.
but I'd rather see some artistic experimentation than stick with FFS.Me too.
Post by: wierd on December 04, 2015, 01:01:45 pm
(But Alien Nation suffered the "Lets have alien-human SexyTime!" problem, as did Babylon 5.)Alien Nation did allude to people getting injured from "doing it wrong," but the fact that it's possible at all (especially since Newcomers have three genders) is just plain dumb.
I only recall one scene of interspecies SexyTime in Babylon 5, and neither was human. It was a marsupial Narn and a mammalian Centauri, and in the context of the show those two getting together was downright hilarious.
Ambassador Dalenn and Sheridan.
Post by: TempAcc on December 04, 2015, 01:02:44 pm
Post by: Dirst on December 04, 2015, 01:04:26 pm
Gaaah! Very true. Though she underwent some pretty hefty modification to become compatible with a human.(But Alien Nation suffered the "Lets have alien-human SexyTime!" problem, as did Babylon 5.)Alien Nation did allude to people getting injured from "doing it wrong," but the fact that it's possible at all (especially since Newcomers have three genders) is just plain dumb.
I only recall one scene of interspecies SexyTime in Babylon 5, and neither was human. It was a marsupial Narn and a mammalian Centauri, and in the context of the show those two getting together was downright hilarious.
Ambassador Dalenn and Sheridan.
Trivia: The Minbari were originally written as a genderless species, but the first test screenings were done before all of the Minbari voices were electronically altered. They cast an actress for Dalenn because they knew the character would be modified later in the story, and for whatever reason the test audience liked the distinctly male and female voices. This is part of why Minbari look a bit different in the series than the pilot (and with significantly more gender dimorphism).
Post by: wierd on December 04, 2015, 01:04:49 pm
It gets double plus ungood when they do that with aliens in sci-fi.
Post by: LordBaal on December 04, 2015, 01:07:24 pm
Post by: TempAcc on December 04, 2015, 01:12:38 pm
It just irks me that hollywood writers cant seem to pull off a human interest story without using sex.
It gets double plus ungood when they do that with aliens in sci-fi.
I think so too. It always bothered my just how hard it is to find a sci fi story about aliens in which the aliens are at least a bit inhuman. Its also my biggest turnoff in regards to star trek, and I actualy like star trek, mind you.
I always hated how hard they tried to invent an in-universe reason as to why pretty much every alien that shows up in the series are humanoids with weird foreheads. Ocasionaly, some non human alien shows up, but they're never actualy important or interact with the plot much, and seem to have a very human mindset.
There was this 4x game thing for the pc in which pretty much every alien species looked REALLY alien and even non euclidean, but I can't remember the name of it. I faintly remember one of the species being entirely composed of flying female blob things that seem to be made almost entirely of sexual organs, boobs and jello :v
Post by: Culise on December 04, 2015, 01:20:41 pm
Post by: TempAcc on December 04, 2015, 01:24:02 pm
Here's a screenshot of the alien I was referring to.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Of course, I can still vaguely make out some human shapes in it, but they did a better job at making aliens than, say, hollywood. Granted, some of the aliens look hilarious (oh noes, space mammoths), but hey.
Post by: Starver on December 04, 2015, 05:48:08 pm
I recall that there was some variation among the Narn of Babylon 5Related 'fact' (some slight disputes, but sounds good, so I'm rolling with it), regarding the Centauri race's styling. In particular the hair-styling.
Londo (or his actor, Peter Jurasik, rather) went into make-up to prep him for the so-far-undecided hairstyle he was to get to represent the 'ancient and decadent republic' theme. They drew his hair back in the now-familiar fashion just to get ready for the final decision of what to do with it by JMS. JMS saw it like that and thought that was their proposal, and liked it, so it quite literally stuck like that!
(There's a lot of discussion about the hairstyle in season 1 being not as neat as in later seasons, but (in-universe) that can be explained by Ambassador Mollari was in a dead-end position with only a degree dead-end pride in his appearance. His social status entitles him (by long-standing standards) to the length of the hair-crest, but he's too interested in various leisure activities and too surrounded by non-Centauri to take too much care. His star rises (and, even when it isn't doing, he's trying to make it rise) in later series and so he takes more pride in his appearance. Naturally, in a patriarchal society (ostensibly so, anyway, Londo's three differently-scheming wives show that the females of the species could at least sometimes be quite formidable background powers), their women have zero status and thus no 'fan' at all (or restrict themselves to a ponytail from an otherwise bald head). And an emperor can do what he likes. So, when a new one comes along who wilfully overturns the old standard, he is of course copied by many an ingratiating lacky. But not Londo, who is a traditionalist who has no interest in changing his accustomed ways.)
Of course, there's a lot on B5 that is intriguing in that way. Separating that which is canon from that which is fanon is a sometimes thankless task, though. ;)
Post by: Bohandas on December 04, 2015, 06:25:28 pm
It just irks me that hollywood writers cant seem to pull off a human interest story without using sex.
It gets double plus ungood when they do that with aliens in sci-fi.
I didn't even touched the issue of sex itself because that's beyond reason. It could go from a harmless (if shocking) activity to certain death, or anything between, passing of course by the oh! all fun possibility of your genitalia dissolving or the act making you go sick beyond limits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7WwOOuwSlM#t=10m05s
Post by: Sergius on December 06, 2015, 11:55:20 pm
Post by: wierd on December 07, 2015, 02:57:36 am
Post by: Sergius on December 07, 2015, 11:58:38 am
Isnt that what spandex actually does though?
Stretch and then go back to original size? Or stretch and remain stretched forever?
Post by: Neonivek on December 07, 2015, 12:12:33 pm
Isnt that what spandex actually does though?
Stretch and then go back to original size? Or stretch and remain stretched forever?
It does both in real life :P
Post by: Dutrius on December 07, 2015, 01:38:47 pm
Post by: TempAcc on December 07, 2015, 01:42:00 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on December 18, 2015, 07:55:07 pm
Spoiler: StarWars: Force Awakens spoilers (click to show/hide)
And, finally, the single non-spoilery nitpick/question, did anyone else feel like they tried shoving three movies into one with this?
Post by: Dirst on December 18, 2015, 08:04:51 pm
And, finally, the single non-spoilery nitpick/question, did anyone else feel like they tried shoving three movies into one with this?Oh, you preferred when Peter Jackson tried to stretch one movie into three with The Hobbit?
Post by: Bohandas on December 18, 2015, 09:10:38 pm
And, finally, the single non-spoilery nitpick/question, did anyone else feel like they tried shoving three movies into one with this?Oh, you preferred when Peter Jackson tried to stretch one movie into three with The Hobbit?
To be honest I think Peter Jackson's adaptation of The Hobbit has fewer pacing problems than the original novel did.
EDIT:
Tolkien was like Lovecraft and Dickens, he told good stories badly.
Post by: Aseaheru on December 18, 2015, 09:48:27 pm
Nope, but I am honestly not sure which is worse.And, finally, the single non-spoilery nitpick/question, did anyone else feel like they tried shoving three movies into one with this?Oh, you preferred when Peter Jackson tried to stretch one movie into three with The Hobbit?
To be honest I think Peter Jackson's adaptation of The Hobbit has fewer pacing problems than the original novel did.True, but three movies overdid it slightly. Two movies would have been better.
Post by: Starver on December 19, 2015, 09:44:47 am
Post by: i2amroy on December 19, 2015, 01:03:45 pm
I think it was in that rough spot where it was more than you could fit comfortably into two, but still too small to fit nicely into three. We had like; 7.5 hours worth of content, slightly too big for two films, but definitely not really long enough for three. :PTo be honest I think Peter Jackson's adaptation of The Hobbit has fewer pacing problems than the original novel did.True, but three movies overdid it slightly. Two movies would have been better.
I think they probably could have still cut a few of the "overshadowed by Smaug/dragon's greed" moments as well as a few other bits from the third film to shorten things up a bit without much real harm done.
Post by: LordBaal on December 21, 2015, 08:45:06 am
Spoiler: Well, kinda spoiler, I won't go much into detail (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on December 23, 2015, 08:16:58 pm
Spoiler: It is about the Smart Blood (long!) (click to show/hide)
I liked the film, in general. A lot of nods back to previous films. I'm sure that if I checked there'd be a shot-for-shot copy of (at least some of) the fight scene on the train from From Russia With Love, and other little titbits like that. But, hell, that above nitpick is annoying. And I'm sure you agree. (Either that, or that the nitpicker is annoying!)
Post by: Bohandas on December 27, 2015, 01:32:35 am
Post by: Neonivek on December 27, 2015, 05:22:15 am
Despite Star Wars hasn't always been exactly hard sci-fi, having lots of fantasy in them, I can't help but feel Disney somehow finished pushing the scale all in favour of fantasy, so now is a fantasy franchise with some sci-fi, or simply a fantasy history on a futuristic setting.
Alas that happened far before Disney got their hands on it.
What with magic zombies being canonical for the Starwars universe... and voodoo.
Post by: Dirst on December 27, 2015, 01:56:16 pm
Disney nuked the extended universe so they had more than a couple atomic radii of wiggle room while making new movies.Despite Star Wars hasn't always been exactly hard sci-fi, having lots of fantasy in them, I can't help but feel Disney somehow finished pushing the scale all in favour of fantasy, so now is a fantasy franchise with some sci-fi, or simply a fantasy history on a futuristic setting.
Alas that happened far before Disney got their hands on it.
What with magic zombies being canonical for the Starwars universe... and voodoo.
Post by: Neonivek on December 27, 2015, 01:57:27 pm
Disney nuked the extended universe so they had more than a couple atomic radii of wiggle room while making new movies.Despite Star Wars hasn't always been exactly hard sci-fi, having lots of fantasy in them, I can't help but feel Disney somehow finished pushing the scale all in favour of fantasy, so now is a fantasy franchise with some sci-fi, or simply a fantasy history on a futuristic setting.
Alas that happened far before Disney got their hands on it.
What with magic zombies being canonical for the Starwars universe... and voodoo.
Fortunately for people who like magic zombies and voodoo they are no longer extended universe thanks to the Clone Wars TV show
Post by: Dirst on December 27, 2015, 02:01:15 pm
Didn't realize anything animated was canon. I'll stick with DF where I can decide what's canon by changing the raws. :)Disney nuked the extended universe so they had more than a couple atomic radii of wiggle room while making new movies.Despite Star Wars hasn't always been exactly hard sci-fi, having lots of fantasy in them, I can't help but feel Disney somehow finished pushing the scale all in favour of fantasy, so now is a fantasy franchise with some sci-fi, or simply a fantasy history on a futuristic setting.
Alas that happened far before Disney got their hands on it.
What with magic zombies being canonical for the Starwars universe... and voodoo.
Fortunately for people who like magic zombies and voodoo they are no longer extended universe thanks to the Clone Wars TV show
Post by: PTTG?? on December 27, 2015, 02:41:13 pm
Post by: LordBaal on December 27, 2015, 03:22:13 pm
Now, dark side of the force animated bodies is not that farfetched.
Disney said the only cannon now is what it is on the movies. No more no less, it remains to be seen, as far as I know, if the original Clone Wars cartoon shorts, and the so so clone war series are cannon.
Given the old good cartoons actually ended right at the start of the Revenge of the Sith and was made to be a bridge from Episode II and Episode III, I would incline to believe they are cannon too, at least the last episode. They started as commercials but then people realized how cool it was and expanded it.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on December 27, 2015, 04:34:22 pm
Post by: LordBaal on December 29, 2015, 12:10:10 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on December 29, 2015, 12:23:52 pm
Quote
This includes the six Star Wars episodes, **and the many hours of content he developed and produced in Star Wars: The Clone Wars.** These stories are the immovable objects of Star Wars history, the characters and events to which all other tales must align.
http://www.starwars.com/news/the-legendary-star-wars-expanded-universe-turns-a-new-page
"Star Wars : The Clone Wars" is grade A canon, on equal level with the movies, apparently. The 2003 series, simple called : "The Clone Wars" isn't mentioned and thus isn't canon.
Post by: Neonivek on December 29, 2015, 01:13:38 pm
Heck some of the 2003 Clone Wars exclusive characters end up in Star Wars: The Clone Wars.
---
Watching "Dawn of the Croods" to see if it is any good
YES I know it is for kids.
Anyhow I can't enjoy it because I can't get out of my head how much I know about pre-historic people.
-"Old people are useless": they were quite revered in ancient society
-"There are bait and bonkers" (Basically people who act like bait, and people who throw stones): No, hunting tended to be low speed chases for days and they didn't use people as live bait
I get the joke... The Croods is a butchered modern IDEA of what pre-historic times are like WHILE at the same time being basically a modern day family. But I can't get it out of my head, it like hits all the wrong buttons for me...
AHHH!
Post by: Rolan7 on December 29, 2015, 01:57:51 pm
Though being "canon" is overrated. The EU is great, people should enjoy it. It's just that they reserve the right to contradict it in official movies, and warned us ahead of time.
I enjoyed Episode 7, but I like aspects of the post-Rebellion EU enough that I can still read it... despite it largely being contradicted now. Alternate history, let's say.
Post by: Sergius on December 29, 2015, 02:30:49 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on December 29, 2015, 02:56:18 pm
Quote
There is absolutely no reason not to take the 2003 series/movie as canon... given that pretty much every single fact in it is re-established in the main universe... Except exactly one.
Heck some of the 2003 Clone Wars exclusive characters end up in Star Wars: The Clone Wars.
There's everything to think it's not canon. Disney, who owns the franchise, has published a list with what is and what isn't canon. 2003 is in the list of what isn't canon.
What more do you need?
Post by: LordBaal on December 29, 2015, 05:17:06 pm
Post by: Starver on December 29, 2015, 05:34:07 pm
Spoiler: StarWars: Force Awakens spoilers (click to show/hide)
And, finally, the single non-spoilery nitpick/question, did anyone else feel like they tried shoving three movies into one with this?
Spoiler: Having just seen it myself... (click to show/hide)
(NB: Edited at least twice, now...)
Post by: Rolan7 on December 29, 2015, 06:09:32 pm
Ummm. Still until something comes up and directly contradict 2003 clone wars I'll take it as cannon because it fits. The new series fits nicely between both parts of the 2003 series.Common misconception, but "canon" is literally what's *officially* in the universe. Fanon and headcanon really shouldn't be considered derogatory terms, because they're often far better than the real canon.
I'm not going to go into Other M again, but it's a great example. The Prime trilogy is noncanon, Other M is, which makes the canon shit. Fanon mostly reverses that situation, and my headcanon certainly does. Nothing wrong with that. Though Nintendo could score major points with me and other fans by correcting their mistake and changing the official canon.
The Extended Universe was never canon, really. I think the official word was that it should be considered canon unless contradicted by the actual canon sources (the movies and the Clone Wars CGI series). And sure enough, much of it just got contradicted out the wazoo. Doesn't make it any less good, though.
Post by: scriver on December 29, 2015, 06:44:33 pm
Post by: Starver on December 29, 2015, 08:21:29 pm
Yeah, iirc Star Wars utilised a system if degrees of canon or something? Movies having primaniture over the Expanded Universe, books over games, that sort of thing.*waves hand*
These aren't the plots you're looking for.
We can go along our business.
Move along.
(Relevant nitpick: <spoiler> seems to get the hang of that far too quickly... Even if it's against the traditionally weak-willed <spoiler>.)
Post by: LordBaal on December 29, 2015, 11:43:41 pm
Yeah, iirc Star Wars utilised a system if degrees of canon or something? Movies having primaniture over the Expanded Universe, books over games, that sort of thing.*waves hand*
These aren't the plots you're looking for.
We can go along our business.
Move along.
(Relevant nitpick: <spoiler> seems to get the hang of that far too quickly... Even if it's against the traditionally weak-willed <spoiler>.)
Spoiler: Irrelevant Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 10ebbor10 on December 30, 2015, 01:31:19 am
Yeah, iirc Star Wars utilised a system if degrees of canon or something? Movies having primaniture over the Expanded Universe, books over games, that sort of thing.That used to be the case. Disney threw all of that out.
Post by: Dutrius on December 30, 2015, 08:36:22 am
Yeah, iirc Star Wars utilised a system if degrees of canon or something? Movies having primaniture over the Expanded Universe, books over games, that sort of thing.*waves hand*
These aren't the plots you're looking for.
We can go along our business.
Move along.
(Relevant nitpick: <spoiler> seems to get the hang of that far too quickly... Even if it's against the traditionally weak-willed <spoiler>.)Spoiler: Irrelevant Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Yeah, my friend noticed that when we watched it. He also cringed at the fight scenes.
Spoiler: More Spoiler Nitpicks (click to show/hide)
Post by: Grim Portent on December 30, 2015, 08:55:50 am
Why do they snatch children at a young age to turn into stormtroopers (such as Finn, or however you spell his name) when there's a perfectly good clonetrooper making facility? (I assumed it had been destroyed or taken out of commission or something, but my friend says it should still be operational.)
The Empire originally phased out the clones in favour of normal humans for troops in the early years of the Empire. The clones just gradually died off without ever being replaced after the Kaminoans rebelled with clone troopers as their force. The Emperor decided that clones were too easy to subvert compared to normal humans since anything could be put into their indoctrination programs and the last thing he needed was his armies having a new version of Order 66 in them.
Post by: LordBaal on December 30, 2015, 09:08:16 am
Post by: Sergius on December 30, 2015, 12:37:39 pm
Spoiler: More Spoiler Nitpicks (click to show/hide)
A lot of soft sci-fi tech-based nitpicks can be answered by "they made it work somehow". More problematic are things that behave oddly without being made of handwavium. Also, internal consistency > realism: if someone in-universe explains why X isn't possible, one can't just say "well we don't know how it works because it's the future!", but if there's no contradiction, it's all fine.
Post by: Starver on December 30, 2015, 01:46:46 pm
Spoiler: More Spoiler Nitpicks (click to show/hide)
[edit: Hmm, well I didn't, instead I decided to just assume you'd follow the order. And yet I also seemed to skip some things... Unskipping them in this edit.]
In general order:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So a mix there of excusable and inexcusable points, depending on how much you like your Power Of Plot or your Constancy Of Canon...
Post by: Egan_BW on December 30, 2015, 07:09:57 pm
Post by: Aseaheru on January 16, 2016, 11:31:26 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Bohandas on January 29, 2016, 03:54:31 pm
My first encounter of this was when I was a kid with the Power Rangers movie, but I've since encountered it elsewhere as well.
I've actually even seen this happen in movies that aren't even live-action, the Spongebob movies for example, especially the first one, where the animation is different, Neptune's design is completely different than it is in the show, and Spongebob and Patrick are obsessed with an ice-cream shop that hasn't been seen before or since
Post by: Parsely on January 29, 2016, 05:23:01 pm
For The Revenant:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Science. Fantasy. Solved.That's only an answer if the story offers it as one, like when they technobabble in Star Trek. It's still wrong, but at least you can say it was a problem the writers knew about and intentionally handwaved. Otherwise, in the absence of other evidence (interviews), I think it's always fair to assume the writer made a mistake and thus a nitpick can be called fair, in a sense.
I'm not referring to anything specifically aforementioned since I haven't seen the new Star Wars yet. Just speaking generally.
Post by: Sergius on January 29, 2016, 07:02:00 pm
When the sets and costume design and overall feel of a movie based on a TV show is different from that TV show. That bothers me.
My first encounter of this was when I was a kid with the Power Rangers movie, but I've since encountered it elsewhere as well.
Well, at least in that specific case, I can especulate that the reason is that they actually filmed the scenes for the movies, including fight scenes and costumes, while the TV shows are just a bunch of stock footage from Japanese shows stringed together by scenes of US actors in plain clothes with some occasional cosplaying.
I don't have any actual evidence that the former is true to (the movie part) but it's my guess.
Post by: Bohandas on January 29, 2016, 11:37:52 pm
I put my responses inline to avoid BBCode spoiler mess.They could have compressed it enough to turn it into neutron-degenerate matter; and/or already burned off a significant portion of it powering up whatever technobabble runs the main weaponSpoiler: More Spoiler Nitpicks (click to show/hide)
Post by: LordBaal on January 30, 2016, 07:26:27 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Bohandas on January 30, 2016, 12:27:49 pm
When the sets and costume design and overall feel of a movie based on a TV show is different from that TV show. That bothers me.
My first encounter of this was when I was a kid with the Power Rangers movie, but I've since encountered it elsewhere as well.
Well, at least in that specific case, I can especulate that the reason is that they actually filmed the scenes for the movies, including fight scenes and costumes, while the TV shows are just a bunch of stock footage from Japanese shows stringed together by scenes of US actors in plain clothes with some occasional cosplaying.
I don't have any actual evidence that the former is true to (the movie part) but it's my guess.
Har har. It wasn't made of stock footage. The Power Rangers TV show had production values at least as high as Plan 9 From Outer Space.
Post by: Sergius on January 31, 2016, 12:38:56 am
When the sets and costume design and overall feel of a movie based on a TV show is different from that TV show. That bothers me.
My first encounter of this was when I was a kid with the Power Rangers movie, but I've since encountered it elsewhere as well.
Well, at least in that specific case, I can especulate that the reason is that they actually filmed the scenes for the movies, including fight scenes and costumes, while the TV shows are just a bunch of stock footage from Japanese shows stringed together by scenes of US actors in plain clothes with some occasional cosplaying.
I don't have any actual evidence that the former is true to (the movie part) but it's my guess.
Har har. It wasn't made of stock footage. The Power Rangers TV show had production values at least as high as Plan 9 From Outer Space.
Just in case it's not sarcasm:
Quote from: Wikipedia
Production of Power Rangers episodes involves extensive localization of and revision of original Super Sentai source material in order to incorporate American culture and conform to American television standards. Rather than making an English dub or translation of the Japanese footage, Power Rangers programs consist of scenes featuring English-speaking actors (either from the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, or the United Kingdom) spliced with scenes featuring either Japanese actors dubbed into English or the action scenes from the Super Sentai Series featuring the Rangers fighting monsters or the giant robot (Zord and Megazord) battles with English dubbing. In some series, original fight scenes are filmed to incorporate characters or items unique to the Power Rangers production.[5] Like many of Saban Entertainment previous ventures in localizing Japanese television for a Western audience, the plot, character names, and other names usually differ greatly from the source footage, though a few seasons have stayed close to the story of the original Super Sentai season.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Sentai
By stock footage, I meant purchased footage, or whatever it is that the footage that you get for localization is called. But I doubt they used japanese footage for the US movie (that's why it doesn't look like footage from a cheap TV show... it looks like a cheap movie instead). I think there's like one scene in the first 30 seconds where the original Japanese villains get kicked off the planet or something by the "new" all-American villain. Then all the fight scenes had to be made specifically for the movie.
Also at least in one case a female ranger was originally a male in the japanese show, and is played by a male in those fight scenes, and it shows. (first series Yellow ranger I think?)
EDIT: Also, this is for making me talk about the Power Rangers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoFJxRtz-Ik
Post by: Bohandas on January 31, 2016, 12:56:32 am
Post by: Sergius on January 31, 2016, 01:12:39 am
Yeah but only some of the fight scenes were recycled, not all of them. It's as much a bad remake as it is a bad localization.
Any scene where there isn't an american actor out of costume can safely be assumed to be recycled, I believe. But the point is, regardless of which scenes are recycled or not, the fresh ones had to be filmed to match the quality of the original footage, to keep the charade going.
Post by: LordBaal on February 22, 2016, 08:49:27 am
Spoiler: However (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sergius on February 22, 2016, 12:35:24 pm
My example would be the "the Thing" movie, (I haven't watched the newest one but got most of it from synopsis, but I guess it applies to that one too).
It's always stated that "a single cell" can infiltrate another organism and convert it. Yet, it's always shown that the monster is always in close proximity of the heroes, spitting saliva-like stuff everywhere (none of which gets on any of the main characters). So it's really hard to believe that none of them get turned just by a single drop of whatever. Or just touching something that the monster has touched (leaving residue I assume, or even loose cells?). Always someone is turned off-screen or by being very obviously stabbed by a giant appendage (which more often than not results in death rather than conversion).
So, basically, characters have plot immunity until the script says they are killed or whatever, while in practice it would be completely impossible to avoid exposure by "a single cell". They torch the monster but torching something doesn't destroy every "single cell" certainly? Not to mention all the monster goop left behind everywhere.
In the 1982 movie, it's stated at some point that the process requires "darkness". But darkness is very relative. I mean, if a "single cell" gets in your pants it's probably dark inside. There are shadows, so any character that isn't surrounded 360 degrees by floodlights would probably be in danger. It's not like you're going to achieve complete pitch darkness if there's even some exposed sky even at night, unless you're deep in some caves or inside a specially sealed room, like a refrigerator or a cellar.
My only conclusions are 1) plot armor 2) overstated infection abilities 3) 100% chance that everyone is exposed anyway so given time depending on amount of exposure they'll all convert into Thing-mass eventually. #3 is sorta kinda implied sometimes but, eh. Annoys me to no end that the characters even pretend otherwise.
Post by: LordBaal on February 22, 2016, 12:50:22 pm
In the case of the thing if the organism really works infecting people in such way that a single cell will kill you then yes, everyone is death from the moment they breathe. To engage they should need pressurised suits, lots of fire and decontaminating showers that self-destruct after use or whatever.
They say a single cell infects you, however as you point out the events of the movie shows otherwise that directly contradicts the dialogue. Perhaps it's something far more complicated, or require special cells or lots of them. But that would be the writers work to figure out, not you. So in this case the best explanation they can come up with is:
(https://lasangrealrio.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/a-wizard-did-it.jpg)
Post by: Parsely on February 22, 2016, 02:12:08 pm
In the 1982 movie, it's stated at some point that the process requires "darkness".
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Rolan7 on March 11, 2016, 11:18:42 pm
What exactly are purebloods? I *guess* vampires can simply have children normally, because they talk about being "born a vampire". And being born of a changing vampire produces a daywalker, IE blade.
It's just weird since the pureblood/turned tension is a major plot point, but we never see it spelled out that vampires can have children.
Also where the hell did they get enough blood to fill the fire suppressors for the initial rave scene haha. Vampires in this setting must only have to eat like once a week. Because there are like a hundred at the disco, and they're just a subgroup, and feeding is always shown as lethal/creating a vampire. Hell maybe they only have to feed once a month!
Blade 2 spoilers I guess, but it's an action series and doesn't pretend to be much more:
So the clan family heads were all sorta-murdered in Blade 1, but now there's this nosferatu-esque guy who's in charge. Why's he a nosferatu? Also he looks like the reapers, which makes sense since he's their father, but wait his daughter is normal/vampire-sexy!
How did the reaper escape?
Why doesn't he have to feed like his progeny do?
The heart's encased in bone, alright, but why don't bullets still work? Eh I guess it's strong bone.
Mainly...
HOW DID BLADE FALL IN LOVE WITH THE NOT-SERENA
She literally trained for years to murder you. She's the daughter of the local vampire king. You know the vampire team is planning to backstab you... later you show you REALLY planned for that. Yet you save her life and practically cry over her.
For that matter, how did she fall in love with you
Also when that one vampire gets infected, why did he try to hide it. This is some Aliens-level stupidity, I guess he didn't love his girlfriend as much as she loved him.
In general, why do the vampires keep sending mooks to attack Blade. But that's nitpicking to an extreme... Almost as much as wondering why characters always patiently wait for their opponents to pull the swords/knives out of their bodies before continuing the fight.
Why did the vampires preserve Whistler
I actually liked both movies though
Post by: LordBaal on March 12, 2016, 06:59:00 am
My only fear is they screw the second part somehow.
Post by: Sergius on March 12, 2016, 10:36:01 am
Post by: itisnotlogical on March 12, 2016, 06:02:43 pm
Saw deadpool. Is the pinacle of cinematography, in fact it very might be the pinacle of mankind achievements. Hollywood can close it's doors now... :p
My only fear is they screw the second part somehow.
Spoiler: Actual Deadpool spoilers (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sergius on March 13, 2016, 08:35:45 pm
Saw deadpool. Is the pinacle of cinematography, in fact it very might be the pinacle of mankind achievements. Hollywood can close it's doors now... :p
My only fear is they screw the second part somehow.Spoiler: Actual Deadpool spoilers (click to show/hide)
I'm not going to pretend I'm a big Deadpool expert, but I saw one of them "Comixplained" videos on youtoob and it would seem there are more facets to DP than being a zany violent buffoon (some writers sometimes go the other way like black comedy with some drama stuff) and the fanbase is split somewhere around the middle, so I guess they wanted to cover that too.
Post by: LordBaal on March 13, 2016, 09:07:39 pm
Post by: itisnotlogical on March 20, 2016, 08:41:30 am
Post by: Parsely on March 20, 2016, 09:33:44 am
I saw "The Martian" the other day, and it really bothered me that the astronauts did not act professionally. At all. They were written more like bit parts in a third-rate action movie than trained professionals in deep space.The movie fails to properly capture any of the science, the hard work the author did researching to get things right (i.e. the entire point of The Martian), that the book contains.
Post by: LordBaal on March 20, 2016, 01:05:58 pm
Post by: Parsely on March 20, 2016, 08:22:44 pm
Yes, but if the movie followed the book's example of style, then all of 10000 people will have enjoyed it.Absolutely not. The book is very down-to-earth. That's where the movie gets its humor from; the smart, successful astronaut speaks in plain, modern English ("I'm going to have to science the shit out of this."). The dialogue reads like something Stephen King wrote, except less vulgar.
I'm bad at box office numbers, so replace 10000 with whatever appropriately low number applies. I know at least 2 people who enjoyed the movie and consider the book to be borderline unreadable. Personally, I haven't read the book, but it seems to cater to a very specific audience. The general public is not that audience.
Post by: Sheb on March 21, 2016, 08:02:24 am
Post by: Parsely on March 21, 2016, 12:36:24 pm
The book's writing WAS terrible. Great science, but it's fun to read despite the author's writing, not because of it.Terrible in what sense, because though I only listened to the audio book once, I am inclined to strongly disagree with you?
My first guess is that you hated the protagonist.
Post by: Sheb on March 21, 2016, 01:04:45 pm
Post by: Parsely on March 21, 2016, 01:24:10 pm
The characters were not developed in the least.Fair enough I guess. Everyone who isn't Watney didn't get much told about them and just serve as a means to an ultimate resolution to the story.
Jokes and swearing are subjective. I thought it was pretty funny aside from overdoing it a little with the pop culture references, not quite as cringe-inducing as Ready Player One (if any book deserves to get ripped to shreds for relying on references it is that one). Swearing is also fine because of his depressingly bleak situation.
Post by: Sheb on March 21, 2016, 01:28:57 pm
Overall, I enjoyed the book, but hated the writing. I was really looking forward to the movie because of that, and it was quite good I think, even if the format doesn't let them dwelve as long on the science thing.
Post by: Parsely on March 21, 2016, 02:11:02 pm
Even Watney doesn't really get through the kind of psychological despair and so on you'd expect. Although to be fair it's also to focus more on the science of staying alive.The author does the legwork justifying that by mentioning that he is a terrifyingly cheerful person and that that's part of why he's on the team of astronauts. The reason he decides to write the diary is also as a way of venting and relieving himself psychologically. Not to mention pretty early on he-
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sonlirain on March 21, 2016, 02:55:52 pm
Zootopia.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Parsely on March 21, 2016, 03:12:46 pm
Ok this will be spoilerrific so i'll keep it in spoilers.Sounds like the movie was too vague in it's message.
Zootopia.And now in hindsight... it's as if tumblr made this movie and i'm annoyed that i retroactively managed to ruin my experience.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Starver on March 21, 2016, 03:26:32 pm
Ok this will be spoilerrific so i'll keep it in spoilers.Haven't seen it, and probably won't any time soon, so was willing to read your spoiler.
Zootopia.
[...]
Apart from the colour polarisation you mention, it doesn't seem too far off the plot I expected from hearing what the producers/writers/whoeveritwaswhogotinterviewed hinted towards, in some interview with them before release.
Because prey animals necessarily outnumber their hunters, naturally, and so if they then happened to form a coherent (and dare I suggest 'democratic'?) society, but now without all the normal 'red in tooth and claw' going on, who is dominant?
Or such was the initial conceit, so it was said, and was pre-release information I have no qualms mentioning. Doubtless you know more, having actually seen the production. (The rest of the spoiler, as I understand it, follows on from that. But I'll leave my exact analysis and thoughts on that unsaid lest I spoil in the open that which you deliberately hid.)
Post by: Sonlirain on March 21, 2016, 03:48:34 pm
QuoteWell i polarized it a bit too much i guess that's that's the gist of it but there are other conflicts that straight up black vs white.
Like for example the main character rabbit who wants to be a policewoman and came to the big city from a rural area.
She's getting discriminated as well because she's perceived as too smal and weak to be a good cop.
It looks like misogyny at first until you realize that the issue is again racial... rabbits are just too darn small.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on March 22, 2016, 05:16:00 am
Post by: CURRENTYEAR on March 22, 2016, 06:14:00 pm
Ok this will be spoilerrific so i'll keep it in spoilers.
Zootopia.And now in hindsight... it's as if tumblr made this movie and i'm annoyed that i retroactively managed to ruin my experience.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
What else did you expect from a kid's movie made in the CURRENT YEAR?
I have high hopes for Angry Birds, even though I hate the very idea of a movie based on a 99 cent phone game. It seems like a kinda redpilled movie. I think it's made by a Finnish studio, so that might explain it.
Post by: ZM5 on March 23, 2016, 06:13:16 am
I have high hopes for Angry Birds, even though I hate the very idea of a movie based on a 99 cent phone game. It seems like a kinda redpilled movie. I think it's made by a Finnish studio, so that might explain it.Given the current climate in Europe and the media slamming anything not in line with their narrative, I'm surprised that they can still make the movie without being accused of "racist undertones" or something.
I thought people were overthinking it at first, seemed like a coincidence to me, but after seeing the trailer and all the little reflections of the situation in some of European countries it seemed more like a pattern to me.
Post by: Dirst on March 23, 2016, 05:50:29 pm
From what I recall, the inspiration for the game was that the author thought birds might be angry at pigs because swine flu stole the headlines from the avian flu.I have high hopes for Angry Birds, even though I hate the very idea of a movie based on a 99 cent phone game. It seems like a kinda redpilled movie. I think it's made by a Finnish studio, so that might explain it.Given the current climate in Europe and the media slamming anything not in line with their narrative, I'm surprised that they can still make the movie without being accused of "racist undertones" or something.
I thought people were overthinking it at first, seemed like a coincidence to me, but after seeing the trailer and all the little reflections of the situation in some of European countries it seemed more like a pattern to me.
Post by: LordBaal on March 24, 2016, 06:34:54 pm
Has anyone said anything about Kung Fu Panda 3? It's too late for me to be making any coherent points but I know in my gut there were things to be said about that movie.Was terrible predictable in all the senses of the word. And the supernatural menace felt overly forced and somewhat smears the coolness of the past movies. Specially the first one.
Post by: Neonivek on March 24, 2016, 07:32:56 pm
Has anyone said anything about Kung Fu Panda 3? It's too late for me to be making any coherent points but I know in my gut there were things to be said about that movie.Was terrible predictable in all the senses of the word. And the supernatural menace felt overly forced and somewhat smears the coolness of the past movies. Specially the first one.
The issue I guess was he was too unstoppable except right at the end.
Would have been nice if he had to at least defeat you to use his ultimate attack... give the illusion that he might be beatable.
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 03, 2018, 05:36:03 pm
Post by: scriver on July 03, 2018, 05:51:34 pm
Post by: LordBaal on November 05, 2018, 06:12:29 am
Post by: wierd on November 05, 2018, 06:16:42 am
Opening scene: "OK kids, lets see how much RCS fuel I can waste with all the unnecessary movements of my MMU! It's not like it costs thousands of dollars per pound or anything! It makes me look cool, and that's all that matters! Also-- Crew meeting in space!"
Post by: Starver on November 05, 2018, 08:35:34 am
(And the "record for being in space", that I think he was pressing for, would have been accomplished and more justifiable to whoever at Mission Control he was being supported by just sitting still (relatively). I'm sure they could have worked out a good reason to be 'sat just off the shuttle' to oversee some other aspect of work or other. Without the inherently dangerous dynamics that were worse than just twiddling thumbs.)
Spoiler: Actual spoiler/opinion for movie, while we're here (click to show/hide)
Post by: Il Palazzo on November 05, 2018, 09:45:41 am
Post by: Kagus on November 05, 2018, 09:47:25 am
In the alternate universe of Gravity, a fire extinguisher has enough oomph to change orbital planes to rendezvous with Tiangong-1 from ISS. I suspect the RCS thrusters are likewise made from repurposes extinguishers, thus having enough spare delta-V to go to the Moon if needed be.Someone's been playing SS13, I see.
Post by: Il Palazzo on November 05, 2018, 10:00:05 am
Post by: Kagus on November 05, 2018, 10:04:44 am
It's amazing how the mind can be irrationally resistant to acquiring arbitrary bits of knowledge. For example, I keep deluding myself that one day I'll muster enough focus and care to properly figure out what SS13 is. For now, I've decided to assume 'playing SS13' is an euphemism for masturbation. Which would mean you think I'm going blind, I guess?Well, that sort of experience would indicate a certain proficiency with a hose and nozzle, which would be helpful when using a fire extinguisher to maneuver in a zero-gravity environment.
And if you're resistant to acquiring arbitrary bits of knowledge, SS13 isn't really for you.
Post by: Il Palazzo on November 05, 2018, 10:18:44 am
SS13 isn't really for you.I've always known it in my heart. Thank you for the validation.
Post by: Rowanas on November 05, 2018, 10:25:48 am
It's amazing how the mind can be irrationally resistant to acquiring arbitrary bits of knowledge. For example, I keep deluding myself that one day I'll muster enough focus and care to properly figure out what SS13 is. For now, I've decided to assume 'playing SS13' is an euphemism for masturbation. Which would mean you think I'm going blind, I guess?Well, that sort of experience would indicate a certain proficiency with a hose and nozzle, which would be helpful when using a fire extinguisher to maneuver in a zero-gravity environment.
And if you're resistant to acquiring arbitrary bits of knowledge, SS13 isn't really for you.
I want to learn! I want to try, but I never... quite... find the time.
Post by: Starver on November 05, 2018, 12:15:34 pm
Post by: ggamer on November 05, 2018, 04:05:39 pm
I've had a lot of gripes with the Blizzard character designers over the years (just in Overwatch the costume design sucks sometimes and I can't... why the LED's blizzard. why are people turning their bodies into ricers. it doesn't make sense.) but this just really takes the cake. It's like someone is in charge making sure every female character fits an extremely specific fetish.
They pass up on genuinely cool ideas for character design (everybody was hoping Blackwatch McCree would be a young McCree with like, a kevlar vest and boots he'd look more like Reyes does and it'd be lit, instead we got the edgiest cowboy in the southwest) just so they can fit with these incredibly strange and nonsensical character design guidelines. I need to know more. I need to know who the fetish guy is. How much does he get paid? Is this the same guy that made every male WoW character 8 feet tall? Who are you blizzard design man.
Post by: Kagus on November 05, 2018, 04:11:25 pm
Didier hasn't officially been part of Blizz for years though, so I have no idea who's calling the shots there now. I could ask some of the peeps I know who work there (in the art department even), but that would involve social interaction.
Torbjörnette when.
Post by: WealthyRadish on November 05, 2018, 07:54:41 pm
Post by: scriver on November 06, 2018, 01:26:05 am
Warcraft 3 too now that that I think of it.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 11, 2018, 10:16:29 pm
This is probably an unpopular opinion, but Blizzard's style and aesthetic tone has always struck me as peculiarly horrible in small ways. I get the impression that every aspect of their work is engineered by committee to not only be the most inoffensive and accessible content possible to any audience today, but also to be so unambitious that it can stay passable for any unknown future audience decades later. It's like they don't know if Wahhabi stay-at-home moms will be the next lucrative market they'll need to hoover up in 15 years, so they keep everything so plodding and puddle-deep that it could be sold to them if the opportunity arises. It's not that much of it is exceedingly ugly, but it shoves the mercenary cynicism of their commercial motives right in the player's face in a way that I could never get past.I got that impression with the strange characterisation of Sarah Kerrigan, especially their attempts to have her be sympathetic & the destroyer of billions of innocents at the same time
Though I imagine that's true of a lot of things these days, you start off with a creative vision made by a dozen arguing writers and then you have focus groups play with the frankenstein monster the writers made while the producers are bringing the thing to life