Your most pointless TV/movie/book nitpicks

[Ruin Explorer]

Rare reverse example - Slow Horses S5.

(Not really spoilers as this happens nearly immediately) - A guy shoots a bunch of people with an assault rifle, gets sniped at the end of his rampage (by someone waiting for him to finish), and I was immediately like, "Well, that's a 5.56mm weapon, and that sniper rifle is 7.62mm, so they'll know he got got by someone else, but they would almost certainly initially assume it was suicide, because it's going to be hard to tell until someone who knows what to look for takes a careful look". "Also that rifle is a high-end military one, no-way the intelligence services believe he just bought it on the black market or something!".

And that's exactly what happened! Good job, writers! Actually did some research and applied some logic, even if you used a kinda-weird name for the FN SCAR.

There were actually several more hyper-specific things which I've not forgotten because they just kept getting them right, which isn't as memorable as getting them wrong. Not that Slow Horses always does, and there were a couple of implausible elements (eco-terrorists in the UK? Pull the other one, it's got bells on. Annoying protestors, sure, terrorists? They haven't got it in them. Animal rights is a different matter. But people with one ideology supplying another? That happens. A white gun-building guy who went to jail recently was a hardline "kill em all" anti-Muslim psycho who was... mostly selling his guns to Muslim criminals, seemingly not seeing any contradiction), but overall, really exceptional in a spy show/thriller to not screw basic easy-to-research stuff up constantly.

 

[Aeson]

Can I nitpick the fact that people nitpick media?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Can I nitpick the fact that people nitpick media?

I think that's just a complaint.

 

[Ryujin]

Probably something that only bothers a very specific demographic: I hate when the "motorcycle chase" is taking place at about 30 MPH and they're trying to hide it with camera tricks. I've done racing schools. I've done dozens of track days. I shot races for 20 years. A vertical motorcycle isn't taking even a gentle curve at speed, if it's upright. Not even if you tilt the camera at a 45 degree angle.

 

[Deset Gled]

Probably something that only bothers a very specific demographic: I hate when the "motorcycle chase" is taking place at about 30 MPH and they're trying to hide it with camera tricks. I've done racing schools. I've done dozens of track days. I shot races for 20 years. A vertical motorcycle isn't taking even a gentle curve at speed, if it's upright. Not even if you tilt the camera at a 45 degree angle.

Do you give them any points for safety, though? Is a real motorcycle in a slightly cheesy edit better or worse than switching to CGI or some other solution, especially after you consider budget issues related to high risk stunts?

I've had a similar issue with snakes before. Especially in lower budget things, there's a recurring problem that the dangerous viper/rattler/whatever is obviously a harmless corn snake, ball python, or something similar. But I also feel like I'd rather see an incorrect - but real - reptile than bad CGI or awkward stock footage, so I inconsider it the lesser of bad choices. YMMV.

 

[Ryujin]

Do you give them any points for safety, though? Is a real motorcycle in a slightly cheesy edit better or worse than switching to CGI or some other solution, especially after you consider budget issues related to high risk stunts?

I've had a similar issue with snakes before. Especially in lower budget things, there's a recurring problem that the dangerous viper/rattler/whatever is obviously a harmless corn snake, ball python, or something similar. But I also feel like I'd rather see an incorrect - but real - reptile than bad CGI or awkward stock footage, so I inconsider it the lesser of bad choices. YMMV.

Not really. You can do things right without CGI, or risking safety. You just need people who know what they're doing. For example this video was shot quite safely. I did the website for and was crew for the female rider (not the model who takes of the helmet) and would talk suspension setups with the male rider (not the male lead).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

You just need people who know what they're doing.

Who are expensive. Which is why they are limited to megabudget Tom Cruise movies. Personally, I would rather watch something that blew its budget on actors rather than stunts.

1970s Doctor Who. Didn’t have the money for expensive FX, so it didn’t try. It was theatrical, depending on the audience to use their imaginations to replace to obvious unreality.

 

[Ryujin]

Who are expensive. Which is why they are limited to megabudget Tom Cruise movies. Personally, I would rather watch something that blew its budget on actors rather than stunts.

1970s Doctor Who. Didn’t have the money for expensive FX, so it didn’t try. It was theatrical, depending on the audience to use their imaginations to replace to obvious unreality.

And that's fine. Write something without that sort of action, instead of doing it badly. I'm fine with movies like "GATTACA."

New Who has action. They run everywhere. Doesn't need stunts.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

And that's fine. Write something without that sort of action, instead of doing it badly. I'm fine with movies like "GATTACA."

New Who has action. They run everywhere. Doesn't need stunts.

They used to do a lot of running in in old Who too.

But I don’t have a problem with poor FX or stunt work if it advances the story.

 

[Ryujin]

They used to do a lot of running in in old Who too.

But I don’t have a problem with poor FX or stunt work if it advances the story.

If it's a good story then I can generally ignore the bad stunt work. The problem comes when it's just some action/adventure mindless drek and they drop in something like that. I just can't ignore it.