Gun Usage in Movies...

[Chance1234]

blank guns need reloading to....


Bar from the Rambo sort of genre ,

i think if you do look there is quite a lot of unloading /loading going on ,

i guesd its shots like the guy diving and rolling across the floor firing his gun that adds to this never loading thing.. also anyone who has fired a real gun will know , you can empty some hand guns in less than a second,

Think about It,

shot 1 LS of the Dive. actor fires ofg full mag on Hand gun which takes less than a second,

Shot 2, MS As guy rolls on the floor , gun been reloaded for contintuinty sake, and he fires off again a second.

Shot 3, CU of the Actor Firing the gun again the mags been reloaded for continuity, again fires off in a second

to be more generic, something in real life that would be over in a flash is played out and extended in the movies , same thing with car crashes.

[miker]

another thing that isn't true to life in all these movies with guns ... we never get to see where they got the guns from or how much they paid for them. i mean, how could they leave that out of the story! and people seem to hardly ever use the bathroom, surely there's potential for dramatic filmmaking there? as for all the spaceships, i don't fall for all that stuff for one minute!

lazer guns! pah!

Light Amplification by Stimulation of Emitted Radiation is LASER! LASER! LASER! what are we teaching our children!

i wonder if coalition forces realise they have to reload, or have been watching too many hollywood movies to realise? the tragedy!

i just can't believe how fabricated movies are -- it's like, someone MADE them or something!

[Alex]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by miker:
people seem to hardly ever use the bathroom, surely there's potential for dramatic filmmaking there?

</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, yes. It would be quite interesting to see how a guy with a gun hidden in his crotch is able to nonchalantly take a pee.


<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by miker:


i wonder if coalition forces realise they have to reload, or have been watching too many hollywood movies to realise? the tragedy! </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, now that you mention it, there were quite a few perplexed individuals in the media and the U.S. that were shocked that we didn't just march into Bagdhad. In fact, many were shocked that we had to "reload" and bring in more troops. I know you were being saracastic but you do make an excellent point for how the glibness over reloading in movies seems to have spilled over into how we perceive war & "victory".


<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by miker:

i just can't believe how fabricated movies are -- it's like, someone MADE them or something!</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

The use of violent tools automatically gives credence to a movie. Guns, knives, stunts, explosions, all "heighten" the authenticity and importance of a movie. I'm suggesting that the additional authenticity of playing by the rule of gun re-loading may make the movie "less sexy" but more substantive.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ April 04, 2003 02:12 AM: Message edited by: Super-8mm in the DigitalAge ]</font>

[Actor]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
anyone who has fired a real gun will know , you can empty some hand guns in less than a second,
</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
I've fired the Colt .45 cal semi-automatic pistol, courtesy of the U.S. Army. The Colt is a fine piece of work, a real amok-stopper. It has a very high recycle rate and in theory you could empty it in less than a second. In practice you can't because of the recoil. The first round may be right on target but then you find the gun pointing at the sky. It takes about a second to bring the gun back on target.

Hollywood guns fire blanks and hardly ever have any recoil. The notable exception is Dirty Harry's .44 Magnum. Every time he fires it, it jerks upward. Of course Eastwood is firing blanks and it is he who is providing the upward motion.

[Them1tch]

I really wasn't gonna reply to this.
The thought of a single shot firing pistol unloading a mag in one second is laughable. I struggle to unload a .9mm in 4 seconds. Just thought I'd laugh thats all.

Me

[Alex]

In addition to the reloading time, how many extra bullets can one carry on their body and not look like their carrying any bullets?

Maybe there's a reason this gun stuff is dumbed down for us, the viewing audience. Perhaps it's dumbed down so that if any of us were ever to engage in a gun battle with some other entity it would so not be like what we thought it would be, rather it would be a keystone cop comedy in the making.

I talked to someone who was held up at gunpoint once. He said it was so not like what happens in the movies. The robber didn't keep his revolver out at arms length at all. The robber kept his gun by his own head, pointed at his victim, and whenever the robber turned his head left or right to see if anyone else was around, the gun moved in unison with his head, sort of like a third eye.

I have never in my life seen a robbery done in a movie that was done in the way that this person explained to me. Which makes me wonder, what the **** is wrong with all of these writers, don't they ever interview someone who's had a gun pointed at them before they write a scene about someone being held at gunpoint?

[Micaso]

Although I've never been in or witnessed an armed robbery, I've seen them in the grainy security camera shots on TV shows like "Real TV" and "World's Wildest Police Videos". In most of the hold ups on these mind numbing programs, quite often the guns are held at arms length...

[Alex]

hmmmm. good point.

Perhaps because the counter is a natural barricade, it makes more sense to keep the gun at arms length.

However, if a gunman robs someone in a parking structure, if the gun is held by their own head and pointed at the robbery victim, anyone else who may be some distance away might not be able to tell what is going on.

A dark-haired robber's gun would melt into their own hair from one vantage point, from the opposite vantage point it would be completely obstructed from the view of someone at a distance.

Although discharging a gun while it is near one's ear doesn't quite make sense to me, unless the idea is to minimize the likelihood of actually firing the gun.