Does Hollywood even try to get it right?

No. Its fictional.

They don't care if it has nothing to do with the story.

Wow, that "2nd" instead of "second" makes me want to give some one a copy of the latest AP style guide with a brick tied to it.

How about the 10 shot revolver that Cosner had in Open Range?

Meh. I watch movies for fun, not for 100% true-to-life accuracy. Sometimes it bothers me, but not enough to get bent out of shape about.

Movies are for fun, not realism. If I want reality I'll look at my life, lol.

kingpin008 said:

Meh. I watch movies for fun, not for 100% true-to-life accuracy. Sometimes it bothers me, but not enough to get bent out of shape about.

Click to expand...

Yah same here i like to watch them but some times they mess things up or have non true things and i cant stand it.

I suppose you get mad when you order something from an infomercial and it doesn't work as well as it worked for the guy on TV??

It's a movie, not a training video. You'd have to live under a rock if you thought any different.

Hollywood's not known for making documentaries... they make money on fiction. Fiction sometimes does not equal real-life...



I can't tell you how many times I've wanted to be like Steven Segal, and not have to ever reload my 1911...

Few things, because this has bugged me as well.

First: Movies are about storytelling. Storytelling is not about communicating truth, it is about communicating emotion in a way that transcends language, to a group of people so that mankind can, for one brief moment, have a shared experience.

Second: That doesn't mean that storytellers should just make crap up. In fact personally I believe that you should make up as little as possible unless it has some measurable impact on the story. And then be controlled, specific, and honest about your fiction.

Third: It's not "Hollywood" it's writers in Hollywood. Every manner of person works on these projects and those of us who shoot regularly roll our collective eyes when this sort of thing happens. Likewise those of us in motorsport roll our eyes when during some sort of "race" one driver looks at the other, smiles, and takes off, as if winning a race was as simple as putting the pedal down further than the other guy.

This is the problem with hollywood writers, they are informed by other hollywood writers and they hide behind the curtain of "fiction" and "suspended disbelief" but of course we all know when crap is made and when honest fiction is made.

And then there are those who care. Ryan Phillippe for example is a bit of a pretty boy but word on the street is that he is zealous about trigger etiquette whenever he's given a prop gun on set.

Sure, I'm reasonably knowledgeable (or at least I like to think I am) about vehicles, guns, physics, stuff like that, and while sometimes it makes me cringe, depending on the movie, it usually doesn't. Especially when it is the sort of movie that doesn't take itself too seriously. Though one thing that bugs me are movies/TV shows where people offer up everything freely to the cops on a silver platter. I'm sorry, but every time I see this I think, "Get a warrant, sir. Thank you and have a good day. Good bye."

But a movie like Redline, or Torque (no, I did not learn my lessons well) will make me turn into a quivering mass of disbelieving jello, and be ashamed to admit I just watched said movies.

But for the most part it is all entertainment.

How about the 10 shot revolver that Cosner had in Open Range?

Click to expand...

That would have been a pre-1866 revolver. I think the movie shows Costner with an 1861 Navy that was not a 10 shot revolver.

However, there were higher capacity revolvers at that time.

Let's see, LeMat made a 9 shot revolver used in the Civil War.
Walch Navy Model 10 shot and 12 shot Revolvers of 1859, but Costner didn't use one.

They don't care if it has nothing to do with the story.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but don't forget that gun types and traits may be intentionally used to embellish the story.

If you think about it. The problem with getting the facts correct isn't just a gun issue. All sorts of things get equally misrepresented.

Folks its all about entertainment. Any of you ever go to the amusement park and have a good time and actually think the ride you're going on is going to cause bodily harm?

Sit back, and enjoy the movie or show.

Oh, and do you actually think surivor is that life threatening?

James Cameron: "Last time I checked, 'Titanic' sold $1.3 billion worth of tickets, worldwide. Imagine how many more tickets we would have sold if we'd gotten the sky right."

Let's see... 22,000 fps works out to 15,000 miles per hour. The Space Shuttle reenters the atmosphere at 17,500 miles per hour and needs ceramic tiles to keep from burning up.

22,000 fps also works out to just over 4 miles per second. Meteorites travel between 7 and 45 miles per second and they do burn up.

I wonder how long a tiny, copper-coated lead bullet would last at those speeds?

well, of course you would have to make the bullets out of some special super high temp. alloy...

Back 30 years ago I had a friend who liked to go to pro wrestling ... one day somebody confronted him with the "you do know that's fake right? and so why would you go?" his reply was, " you go to the movies, do you think they are real?"

It has got better. Look at some of the classic westerns from the 50s - 60s. They never had dirty shirts, never bled when they were shot, from time to time carried S&W Model 10s or similar, had modern saddles, and if knocked out in a fight ~ it only took a bucket of water to bring them back. The whole framework of that era was a town or group cowering behind a single hero or main character. So much for frontiersmen or all those war veterans. You could even look at the color of a character's hat or listen to the background music to tell what was going to happen. The good guy always won and got the girl in the end.

BOY! Where they ever great when you were 12.

I think they have come a long way. I started seeing real changes in the western when HBO started making some of Louis L'Amour's books into movies. I always heard he was very critical on period dress and firearms.

People in that era did the best they could, but the truth is, they did not have modern amenities and especially on the trail were dirty, unshaven, and pretty rank. I think the modern westerns capture the physical realities of the era more accurately. Period guns, clothing and sets are also more accurate today.

It is fiction, it is entertainment, and some embellishment is required to sell tickets.

*With sarcasm* You should have seen Jonah Hex, he had some awesome firepower.

Seriously, it is just entertainment. However, I do get annoyed when they are trying to be realistic and they get the facts wrong...which is why I don't like cop shows.

How about the 10 shot revolver that Cosner had in Open Range?

Click to expand...

You actually count shots in a movie?

My favorite. .the training facility scene from the Bourne Ultimatum where, the fictitional character, Bourne is pointing a Sig at his foe one minite then a Glock the next.

How about the 10 shot revolver that Cosner had in Open Range?

Click to expand...

I have read that there is a reload on the cutting room floor.
They made the effort but it didn't contribute to the drama and urgency, it seems.

Isaac's Grandpa said:

How about the 10 shot revolver that Cosner had in Open Range?

Click to expand...

Jim Watson said:

I have read that there is a reload on the cutting room floor.
They made the effort but it didn't contribute to the drama and urgency, it seems.

Click to expand...

I heard something like that on the commentary track, and they said they later regretted leaving it out, as the movie otherwise got mad props for the fight scene, except for the "10 shot revolver."

The movie Heat by Michael Mann (DeNiro, Pacino, Kilmer, etc) had a pretty realistic gun fight in it. Michael Mann usually does a pretty good job of "getting things right."

There was a rebuttal to the reload issue some years ago when some prop guy stated that every gun used in Hollywod carries the exact same number of blanks as the real pistol carry live ammo. Multiple camera angles and retakes coupled with editing make the guns seems to have more ammo as the prop guns are usually reloaded between takes, and camera angles can show the same shot mutiple times. So, it's all up to the director and editor on that issue, not the actors, prop guys or stunt men.
As for writers that can't get things right, I worked armored trucking for years, and absolutely cringed when I watched Dead Presidents, there were so many "YEAH, RIGHT!" moments. Ask a real firefighter about Backdraft, too.

So, other than the superfast round, was the movie any good?