927
Movie details (thelemmy.club)
submitted 2 days ago by to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world
255 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 134 points 2 days ago* (45 children)

I count bullets. If someone with a revolver fires off 20 rounds in a row without a pause, the show/movie lost credibility and I'm taken out of it. Extra bad if they later try to use ammo as a plot device to raise drama, ugh.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 45 child comments
    •
  • [–] 27 points 2 days ago (3 children)

    That's a subtle one. If a revolver fires 7 or 9, unforgivable. If it fires 20, they knew damn well what they were doing and it's a Machete Kills style comedy, we're back to acceptable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 13 hours ago

    Honestly it depends on the revolver. Different revolvers do hold different amounts of ammo. I have seen heavier revolvers like .357 or .44 that hold anywhere from 5 to 6 shots. I have also seen light caliber revolvers like a .38 or .32 that holds 8 to even 12 shots. Of course, a 12 shot revolver is typically only a very light weight like the .32, and they tend to be very small guns. Thay being said, most movies don't show that. They show a guy with a huge ass gun that probably only hold 5 to 6 shots at best. Then again, very few shows or movies ever show guns accurately. The sound from shooting even a light caliber gun can deafening in an open space. The sound of a .357 is so loud its unbelievable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    Guns are absurd in almost all movies anyway. Zero reaction to firing in enclosed spaces, powering through a gunshot wound by using muscles that basically no longer exist because a bullet ripped through them, etc. And it's not even just action movies, it happens all the time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    My pet peeve is the reactionless guns with unlimited kinetic energy bullets. The shooter's hand barely twitches but the target flies as if they were hit by a cannonball. Newton would be spinning in his grave.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    I think Newton would be the first to say that being appalled by things doesn't cause a torque force on corpses. Well, he would be if he wasn't dead. I guess it's really just me saying that but trying to add Newton's weight to it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 43 points 2 days ago (8 children)

    It's just bad prop decisions. There are guns that better fit. In a cheap movie, I can forgive it. A budget over 200k? I'm upset

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 2 days ago (7 children)

    I don't know enough about the division of duties to know whose fault it is, but I blame the director. It's just lazy, and easy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (6 children)

    Do any modern movies use revolvers? The only reason i can see for using a revolver is if the movie is set in the past or if there's a plot reason to be using an old gun like e.g. it was his grandfather's

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    They still make revolvers today. They’re supposedly more reliable and easier to maintain.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago

    That was true until about the late 90's. There are quite a few modern pistols that are equally reliable, and require little maintenance. I've fired thousands of rounds through my Glock 21 and although I clean it after every time, I certainly don't have to. And I've never had a malfunction of any kind. Not one. Some guys I know clean theirs two or three times a year.

    Now there are some rather unreliable brands out there still, so I imagine that's why the cliche still exists.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    What? Revolvers are really common. They're incredibly reliable, in a way that a semi auto mag fed pistol isn't.

    A revolver rotates the cylinder and the hammer falls on each individual round. If the ammo is bad (incredibly rare but it happens) then nothing happens, but just pull the trigger again and you're not jammed or anything.

    A mag-fed semi auto, while higher capacity, has WAY more complicated moving parts. There's tons of ways it can jam up or malfunction, and since all the ammo is stacked in the same spring-tensioned magazine, if there's a problem you have to clear the jam in order to fire anything else.

    If you're in a position where you are actually pulling the trigger your fine motor skills are gone because of adrenaline. Clearing a jam like that isn't something you'll be able to do effectively without a ton of training, and most people don't have that kind of training.

    So a lot of people prefer a revolver. It's only 6 shots instead of 11, 17, whatever, but you KNOW you'll get six shots, and the thinking is if that's not enough then 17 probably isn't either. It's personal preference.

    But yeah, they're not just "grandfather" guns.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago

    And if you don’t get 6 shots you advance the chamber and get the others.

    With a mag you gotta swap mags and unjam and ya dead.

    While I disagree with guns for self defense if you were gonna get a pistol: get a shotgun.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    You're buying the wrong pistols then. You can throw a Glock in mid then run 800 rounds through it without cleaning, without jamming. And reloading a pistol is much easier than reloading a revolver. They also don't kick nearly as much as a revolver, making them far more accurate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 23 hours ago

    I shoot an average of 4000 rounds a month. I would bet a whole lot of money that I'm far more familiar with "pistols" in all types than you are.

    Revolvers are pistols.

    Their recoil is often less than a semi auto. It depends on so many factors that saying they have more or less recoil is a nonsense claim; it depends on your ammo and the mass of the gun, primarily.

    Accuracy is the same. Sights matter. Build quality matters. Length of your barrel matters. It all matters.

    You can throw a Ruger GP100 in the mud and I'd trust it any day over a Glock covered in mud. It's foolish to claim otherwise.

    Glocks are great handguns. But they have malfunctions just the same, especially when you have mags with worn out springs like a lot of daily carry guns do because people pack the mags full and then leave them that way for years on end.

    I'm not saying revolvers are better, I'm saying they have pros and cons and it's personal preference. Many people who obviously know more than you do think they're the best guns to carry when you need them most. I won't say I agree or disagree, just that I acknowledge the points, and I'm sharing them here because firearm knowledge is generally abysmal, even in countries where they're readily available.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 2 days ago* (16 children)

    I hate when an actor clearly doesn't even understand how to hold and aim a gun and their character is supposed to be competent at it.

    Cate Blanchet's character in Borderlands is a recent and particularly obvious example. In the movie's trailer she is shown holding and aiming a rifle like someone who clearly never held a gun before and my understanding is that her character was supposed to be a highly competent gunslinger.

    Someone coach those actors for crying out loud.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 2 days ago (3 children)

    Or when people in a gunfight clearly aren't hearing the apocalyptically loud sound gunshots would make in their situation - like in a small room or in a car.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    I love the scene in (a movie, just realized I can talk about it without spoiling if I don't say what movie, those who have seen it will know), where there's an attempt to do a romance scam where they rob you when you get naked to have sex with the bait woman. He takes the other guy's gun, at which point the guy laughs and says it's only loaded with blanks. MC pauses for a second then shoots him in the face point blank anyways because blanks still release a ton of energy, they just don't put half of it in to a small projectile, and the guy ends up rolling on the floor in agony, blinded.

    Though that shot is fired inside and I don't recall if they even acknowledge that aspect of it.

    Archer definitely does, though!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 2 days ago (9 children)

    I think the problem is that Cate Blanchett has too big an ego to be taught/learn anything, including how to act. But that's just my humble opinion.

    I don't know enough to notice bad gunplay but anachronistic makeup/hair styling can bother me. Costumes I give some slack because it could be a budget issue.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    When it's supposed to be a post-apocalyptic/survival genre but everyone looks clean-cut, shaven, and recently showered with a day-old haircut 🙄

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    Oh God yes and women with no body hair in times when only sex workers would shave pits&crotch

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    Yeah I saw a still frame from what appeared to be some sort of post-apocalyptic movie with a grungy super-spy/bounty-hunter type woman as the protagonist. Dirty torn clothes, nappy dreadlocks, the whole works. Clearly hadn't showered in months. And her pits were clean-shaven. I was like "wat."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    To be fair, armpits are pretty quick to shave and I could see some people sticking with some personal hygiene habits in times like that just to feel a bit more normal. Also, if they don't have time for showering, shaving armpits might be one of the most effective ways to keep the smells lower, like the difference between needing to scrub a lot with a sponge or just give it a wipe.

    Personally, I shave my face because once it gets to a certain length, it annoys me. Same with my head. Now I do use an electric razor for both of those and don't go down to the skin for either, so whether I kept up with that or went all mountain man would depend on access to electricity, but if I had that access, I would absolutely spend a bit of time managing that because it starts to be a distraction if I don't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 22 hours ago

    Sure, if you can find enough razor cartridges. Armpits are too concave to use a straight razor on I would think.

    Granted it is possible she did IPL or electrolysis before the downfall of society, so that is a potentially reasonable explanation

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    anachronistic makeup/hair styling

    I don't know if this is exactly "anachronistic" since the movie is set 20,000 years in the future and who knows, but there's a scene in the second installment of the new Dune where the emperor is surrounded by his Sardaukar soldiers and they all have LA hipster haircuts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago

    Yes I think anything that is specifically recognizable like that counts. 80s permed hair is especially noticeable.

    I also sometimes notice "old lady hairstyles" in the old movies that those old ladies watched in their teens, copied their style, and kept doing it for several decades, but that's different.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 2 days ago (3 children)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    This unironically looks pretty cool. It looks like an ESP8266 dev board at the top with a few DIP ICs below that

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago

    That's a bad script supervisor. A script supervisor is responsible for scene continuity between takes. Guaranteed the shooting schedule had a dozen days of frequent high intensity filming and the script supervisor was tired from making sure really busy scenes lined up within the time allowed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago

    Was watching the latest season of slow horses. Great show, I fully recommend. However... a couple of assassins that kept firing their pistols while chasing someone annoyed me. Sure, there was time to reload and it's plausible that they simply didn't show that. But what are the odds that they were carrying 3-4 spare clips with them? Especially since they weren't wearing tactical gear anything of the sort.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent