 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jul 31, 2019 - 6:14 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
jackfu
(Member)
|
CE3K - Flight 19.
Hate? In this case not really I guess, but fictionalized resolutions of real tragedies sometimes bugs me. I watched CE3K last night and I never really have cared for and still don't, the depiction of Flight 19 as being taken by ETs. I would say the treatment was gentle and respectful, but it required a bit too much of disbelief suspension for me. I mean, 14 men died due to a combination of error and circumstances (plus another 13 rescue personnel). Besides, if you were to return 32 years after you vanished and you were still 20, but family/friends/loved ones are now 32 years older, how would that be for them?
Perhaps it would've killed the buzz, but it could have been depicted as a fictional flight. I'm sure I'm overly sensitive about it.
For me it may have started with the old TV movie, The Devil's Triangle and the theory that the airplanes and their crews were "abducted" because no wreckage had been found.
I don't know how the families of the crews felt about that portion of CE3K, but I don't think I'd have approved had I been a family member, even with the rather gentle treatment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...a movie about making movies shows a scene being shot with various elaborate stunts and pyrotechnics all going off in a single uninterrupted take. This is NOT how films are made! I watched 1986's F/X for the first time today, and it opens with a Hollywood movie with a hitman wiping out a restaurant filled with people with a machine gun, and you see bloody body squibs, a waiter set on fire, several detonating fishtanks, etc. All of these shots would have been done in their own inserts, likely on separate days, in order to get them right. No sane director would set up all of these elaborate, potentially dangerous stunts and try to capture them in a single day's filming!
You obviously never saw one of those behind the scenes of GOT featurettes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 9, 2019 - 3:34 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Rameau
(Member)
|
...a movie about making movies shows a scene being shot with various elaborate stunts and pyrotechnics all going off in a single uninterrupted take. This is NOT how films are made! I watched 1986's F/X for the first time today, and it opens with a Hollywood movie with a hitman wiping out a restaurant filled with people with a machine gun, and you see bloody body squibs, a waiter set on fire, several detonating fishtanks, etc. All of these shots would have been done in their own inserts, likely on separate days, in order to get them right. No sane director would set up all of these elaborate, potentially dangerous stunts and try to capture them in a single day's filming!
Yup, the epic car stunt at the end of Hooper is a good example, but if it works well for the film, then the audience is fine with it, most of them don't know any better (& there's no reason why they should).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The antagonist clearly has superior fighting skills to that of the protagonist in action flicks.
It bugs me when you can clearly tell that the antagonist has to dumb-down their abilities so the protagonist can defeat them.
Some actors can pull this off better than others - faking it either way, that is, but sometimes you can easily see how the better fighter has to pause inordinately long or let some blow land that normally never would, eh, you get the idea.
Right. The superior has the other guy on the ground but doesn't finish him off. He will stand over him gloating... Just long enuf for the other guy to grab some dirt to throw in his face...which " blinds" him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
