Posts by Dennis Doyle3

Blade Runner, hands down. It absolutely towers over Odyssey in every single way, except for the visuals—but honestly, it’d be weird if it didn't.

Steven Palmer3 said:I mean, we didn't actually see her die—that was just heavily implied by that final shot of her...

Plus, let's not ignore that leg getting absolutely pulverized by that crowbar—it's practically a hundred different cave scenes waiting to happen...
but whatever, Juno is still great. 😁

Why on earth didn't Juno die at the end of the first movie?I mean, am I crazy, or does it look like she's actually alive in this trailer?

goldenhound32 said:

Dennis Doyle3 As specified by:
Why exactly is this considered unrealistic? I’ll be the first to admit that I don't know the first thing about firearms, but based on what I've seen here, it seems like the protagonist didn't actually commit a mistake.🤷

Why are you taking things out of context?
If that were actually realistic, he would have spent his entire career repeating the same tired clichés, only to turn around and punch the villain in the face the moment they appeared on screen.

What do you mean, "realistic"?

goldenhound32 said:From the era of the 555 prefix convention all the way to the sheer absurdity surrounding firearms...

It's all just one big collection of tropes we've come to expect.

To start things off, here is a little copy-paste I found on a site:

Silencers on revolvers

Only an idiot would ever attempt to put a silencer on a revolver. Silencers are designed for semi-automatic pistols where the gases vent through the barrel; with a revolver, the gas escapes from the cylinder gap, which is essentially wide open.

The empty gun

We have all sat through those scenes where the protagonist—or more often the villain—presses a pistol against someone's head after a long, completely unnecessary monologue, only to pull the trigger and hear a hollow 'click,' revealing the gun was empty. It's another tired cliché. When a semi-auto runs dry, the slide locks back in that position. Furthermore, the firing mechanism locks up, so you wouldn't get a rhythmic clicking sound upon pulling the trigger. Anyone with half a brain can tell if an automatic is empty just by looking at it.

Super-precise snipers

Movie snipers always aim directly for the head, with their crosshairs perfectly centered on the target. Sure, you could do that, but only if the target is within 100 yards. A real sniper has to account for windage, distance, air pressure, and humidity. Under ideal conditions, a sniper will actually aim slightly above the target rather than directly at it. And one more thing: actual snipers aim for the torso, almost never the head.

Clouds of gunpowder smoke

This is the kind of mistake that creeps into the work of writers. The phrase 'the stench of cordite' shows up constantly in cheap crime novels, but cordite has nothing to do with modern ammunition. Cordite was a component of gunpowder used in the late 19th century and hasn't been relevant for ages.

Pump-action shotgun repetition

We’ve all seen this one. After dropping a gritty line like 'Go ahead, make my day,' the hero pumps the shotgun and kills the villain, the monster, the alien, Little Red Riding Hood, or whatever else is standing in their way. This implies only one thing: there wasn't a shell in the chamber. By pumping the shotgun, they are chambering a round; if the hero had pulled the trigger before that, absolutely nothing would have happened.

Side-shooting

If you ever find yourself holding a handgun, try shooting while holding it out to the side of your body. You’ll miss the target by two miles. It looks great on screen, but it bears zero resemblance to reality. There is a reason we hold a gun at eye level and in front of us—it's the only way to actually hit anything. Shooting from the hip gives you about the same chance of hitting something as a long shot at a casino. Slim.

Pressing against the wall

Police officers creep along, guns drawn, scraping their backs against the walls. It doesn't work that way. Real cops fire a few shots and then immediately seek substantial cover. After that comes the shouting and the intimidation to get criminals to surrender. Walls, especially in the US, aren't thick enough to stop a bullet, and bullets have a nasty habit of ricocheting off walls and floors.

Why is this unrealistic? I don't know much about firearms, but according to this logic, the hero didn't even miss.🤷

dustyjackal15 said:Has anyone actually sat through this absolute garbage movie??

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0435679/

I was naive. I saw people checking it out on IMDb, and since it had a 7.7 rating, I figured I’d give it a shot.

The film is trash. Honestly, I don't even want to waste my breath breaking down why, but I need to know—does anyone here actually think this thing is good?!

Don't look at the aggregate score. Just filter out the idiots.😁

I’m talking about movies in general. You know, when one character is talking to another. How on earth do they decide whether to be formal or just keep it casual?
It’s specifically about those films where everyone is speaking English. It just randomly popped into my head yesterday.

I have a bit of a silly question here. It’s not about names or anything, just a translation thing. How on earth do they decide when to use "you" (formal) versus "you" (informal)?

David Walker4 said:I watched this movie strictly for those two, not for the plot, and I don't regret it one bit. Honestly, these guys are in their 60s and they still deliver performances that outshine Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, and whatever trendy young crowd is currently trending in their prime. You have to respect that. At the same time, it would be pretty naive to expect them to be just as powerhouse as they were in The Godfather Part II. I won't say anything for certain—I love being surprised—but I might actually stop watching American movies altogether once this generation of actors passes away. I'm talking about the heavy hitters like Anthony Hopkins, Jack Nicholson, Dustin Hoffman, Morgan Freeman, and Samuel L. Jackson. It’s a scary thought. And look, I totally get why the critics are tearing into them. Critics always go after these projects when veteran actors reach a certain age. Everyone expects them to stay eternally youthful, demanding that every single thing they touch lives up to the legendary status they earned decades ago. It's unfair.Look, let's be real here. This movie just doesn't hold a candle to The Godfather Part II, and it certainly isn't touching Heat. It's not even in the same league.Honestly, it’s a much more engaging watch than some of those overhyped, critically acclaimed blockbusters that have been flooding theaters lately. I don't get the obsession with the big studio fluff. If you actually appreciate top-tier acting, I’d highly recommend this one—especially if you're a fan of this particular duo. "88 Minutes." Just thinking about that flick makes my blood boil a little. It’s one of those movies that sticks in your throat. You sit there, watching the clock tick down, feeling that heavy, suffocating tension. It’s relentless. I don't know if it's the pacing or just the sheer weight of the premise, but it stays with you long after the credits roll. A real gut punch. It’s the same director, actually. Only this time, you've got Al Pacino starring alongside Amy Brenneman—who, if you recall, was also in Heat. Personally? I think this one tops the other.

You can't even put them in the same sentence as Heat. It's not even a fair fight. But if you want to talk comparisons, you could maybe look at 88 Minutes—they’re equally mediocre.

I just finished watching The Matrix.
I have to admit, those fight scenes are absolutely incredible 👍.

Anonymous said:Based on what I caught on the broadcast, the crowd noise was just pathetic. Both sides were terrible.

Look, a TV broadcast isn't always a fair yardstick for how an atmosphere actually feels, but this time you hit the nail on the head. We were awful, and they were awful too.

Ryan Roberts2 said:The movie is anything but trash. The script is actually smart and funny. Sure, it leans on clichés, but they feel intentional. If your idea of peak comedy is something like *Zohan* or *Guru*, then you're honestly beyond help...

Pineapple Express is one of the best comedies out there, period.

Look, I don't care what you consider "peak comedy." Truly. As for the genre itself, I don't watch much comedy, so I’ll just take the consensus at face value. And the majority here is saying it sucks.☕

Arthur Garcia59 said:Honestly, I’m glad to see some people feeling this way. Every time someone brings up IMDb, I’m genuinely baffled by how high those ratings are for such a total disaster.

I was just saying that—thank God I checked the opinions here before wasting my life watching what most of you call absolute garbage.

cosmicraven2 said:🙂 🙂

That has nothing to do with theaters or streaming availability. Too often, movies end up on digital platforms in their home countries long before they ever hit the big screen here in the States. Once a film is online, there is always some good Samaritan who will jump on it and translate it immediately—sometimes with great skill, but more often than not, it's a bit subpar 🙂 .

I wish it were that frequent. 😬

Kyle Lee7 said:Where did you all find this movie? I’m honestly not very good at hunting down films online. Also, does anyone know where to grab the subtitles (in English)?

Look, you've got the subtitles in American English right there—why on earth would you need anything else?

cosmicraven2 said:Exactly. As far as blood and dismemberment go, neither The Others nor The Orphanage feature any of that.

True. But let's be real: The Others is a significantly better film than The Orphanage.

I don't really do comedies. Especially not those modern American ones—you know the type, all those endless parodies like Scary Movie and whatever else they throw at us lately. I can handle something like Inspector Clouseau or that kind of classic slapstick. Honestly, if we're talking about actual American comedy, the last time I actually cracked a smile more than once was watching Elf with Will Ferrell.
Should I bother with this one? I noticed it’s sitting pretty high on IMDb.

I can't seem to get links to work—something's acting up on my end—or maybe I actually can 🙂
. So, you'll probably have to copy and paste them (unless you don't want to) 🙂
.
George S. Patton:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOiqAhi4aiA

Kenneth Branagh (Henry V):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAvmLDkAgAM

Jack Nicholson (A Few Good Men):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAvmLDkAgAM

There are more out there, but these are the ones hitting me right now.

Of course I’m all for it. Dinamo will be playing in at least the EuroLeague every single season regardless. Honestly, this shift is a massive win for our other clubs too. The runners-up and even the Cup winner should get in—it just seems like they'll enter through different preliminary rounds, if I'm reading this correctly.

goldenhound32 said:Great movie, solid 9 out of 10.

I don't get one thing, though. When that Black guy ordered Dorff back into the yard, why did Kilmer have to go with him?

SPOILER:
Because it allows that guy to claim Kilmer killed Dorff later on. Then the guards, in their attempt to stop it, kill Kilmer instead. That was the whole setup.