Does Hollywood even try to get it right?

For example, there was a movie, that I am somewhat embarrassed to admit I watched and enjoyed, where the whole premise was around people who were trained to be super-accurate, and could even curve a bullet around obstructions by waving the gun.

I can't remember the name of it for the life of me, but while it completely ignored real life physics, I didn't care. (Gets on flame suit...)

If you think 22,000fps is fast you should see how fast (and powerful) the lasers in movies are! But they still can hit a thing all that's needed to avoid being shot with a laser gun is a storm trooper firing it.

In a story that is fantasy to begin with, it is not much of a stretch to invent a fantasy rifle and cartridge for it.

If you count Costner's shots he actually shoots 12 times. What they deleted from the scene is when he switches from the 7 1/2" Colt to the 5 1/2" Colt he had stuck in his belt. Two Colts, 6 rounds each, equals 12 shots. In an interview he stated he was really ticked but final production had been completed before he realized the error. All in all, Open Range did it right as far as guns and gear were concerned.

For you older members, I used to like how Steve Austin, the Six Million Dollar Man, could hold down helicopters without hooking his feet into anything. In such a situation, the maximum downward force he'd be able to apply could not exceed his own body weight.

It appears this super fast shooting rifle is the polar opposite of the super slow shooting sniper rifle in "The American".

In "The American" (terrible movie) George Clooney makes a custom designed sniper rifle, a Ruger Mini-14, that shoots at a whopping speed of "300 mph", or "10 mph slower with a suppressor".

I've read that there are special replica guns that use some sort of flammable, pressurized gas to create flash, noise and cycling of the action. Those would probably not require "reloading" very often.
Also, with CGI getting cheaper by the day, I imagine it wouldn't cost much to add a flash digitally to a solid-resin "stunt" gun, and then add sound effects later in post. That would have the advantages of making things easier on an actor that's literally "gun shy," would probably save on blanks, as well as the cost of having an expensive on-set armorer. There are also some location-based restrictions on outdoor filming that prohibit pyrotechnics, so the CGI FX would eliminate that, too.
BTW, I'm not "sticking up for inaccuracies" I'm only explaining circumstances in which expended round counts in the final cut don't line up with the actual capacity of the weapon in question.

ifmdb.org is a really cool database that identifies guns used in movies, often giving some fascinating details and occasional comments on exceptionally unrealistic or realistic depictions of the weapons. (For example, the manner in which the firing of RPG rounds in the 1988 film the Beast).

what about a railgun?

I thought the most recent railgun can shoot a projectile at mach 7. Still not a handgun but shooting projectiles at such speeds will be a reality in the next 100 years.

I can't stand movies that show the viewer looking down the barrel of a revolver and you can see the chambers in the cylinder empty.

Yeah, saw "Open Range" again last night.

Ole Kev did keep firing that 6 shooter quite a while But,

I still enjoyed the movie.

But, No, hollyweird could not care less about getting it right.

At 22,000fps your rifle turns into an anti-tank gun.

Hollywood and reality will never meet. From Clint to Rambo all a bunch of hoey.

I watched Beverly Hills cop the other night,just the last gun fight scene...they actually did stuff right, even for a comedy. Reloading....looks like Eddie Murphy was pretty familiar with the Hi-power.

For example, there was a movie, that I am somewhat embarrassed to admit I watched and enjoyed, where the whole premise was around people who were trained to be super-accurate, and could even curve a bullet around obstructions by waving the gun.

Click to expand...

Wanted

I can't remember the name of it for the life of me, but while it completely ignored real life physics, I didn't care.

Click to expand...

Starring Angelina Jolie.

To be fair in wanted they were supposed to have a psychic ability.

I enjoy watching movies for the entertainment. Even though things may stretch the realms of possibility, I do enjoy them. On the other hand, my wife does not like to watch "medical movies" with me. Having worked in level 1 trauma hospitals for over 20 years, I have been known to make snide comments at some of the medical practices.

Oh there's probably all sorts of technical errors on most movies but unless it's something we actually know about we never notice or give them a thought.

The only reason we tend to notice gun errors is because we're gunnuts looking for them and then point them out to anyone who'll listen so we can then show-off our superior knowledge of guns.



Do you really think that people who aren't into guns care how fast a bullet can really go or actually count the shots in a gunfight?

Hmmmmm.....I just want to know what that bullet - and barrel - were made out of !! >MW

I can't stand movies that show the viewer looking down the barrel of a revolver and you can see the chambers in the cylinder empty.

Click to expand...

If they showed the gun loaded we would be on here complaining about violating the four rules the same way we do with members who post pictures of themselves pointing seemingly loaded guns at the camera. I imagine they know they can't win so they just go with whatever works best for them.

jerkface11 said:

At 22,000fps your rifle turns into an anti-tank gun.

Click to expand...

Not to bloody likely, the fastest projectile ever fired was just achieved by the USN's railgun, which fired a seven pound projectile at just under 8000 fps. Though theoretically it can hurl smaller ones at over 20,000 fps.

Of course it took a ship to generate the electrical energy required to do so....

^And, if my memory serves me well, it was a land-based prototype, so you didn't have to worry about sourcing power, nor the recoil effects. (Don't feel like doing the math, but launching anything that fast is going to require a very stable and secure platform.)

It's possible. You need to fire it in outer space. Maybe rocket boosted bullets? Maybe a sail to catch the solar wind? But then there's no air, so no Mach. So it's impossible.

There are some who try to bring realism to the shootout scenes. Michael Mann, for one.

Most don't care, some do. Seems to me that they are indeed getting better at it. Judging by h ow many "modern" westerns utilize cartridge conversions and guns other than the Colt Model P. Michael Mann goes to more trouble than most. The training that Tom Cruise underwent for Collateral really paid off in his gunfight scenes. It was interesting to read that Daniel Day Lew used a custom built flintlock in The Last of the Mohicans, that was intentionally made extra long for added effect. Tom Selleck is a shooter and it shows in his movies. He goes to extra effort to do something special with his guns. Many of them are purpose built cartridge conversions by Millington, Howell, etc. They also went to a lot of effort to get the guns right in Tombstone, though armchair critics tend to focus on Doc's firing of three shots from a twice-barrel shotgun.