Things in movies that really annoy you

old hippy

Reindeer wrote: »

I watch too much Fringe, and the British and Aussies occasionally say an odd word here or there, but generally do OK.

Fringe is brilliant and I agree about the noisy winged beasties

Mickeroo

Quorum wrote: »

It has some, but if you look up to someone like Jordan, there's quite frankly no hope for you.

As just as celebs can't help if some people see them as a role model, parents can't help if the celebs their children look up to don't behave like role models.

I also disagree that being in the public doe excelling at something makes one a role model, these people are still human.

indeed, the trouble is plenty of girls actually do aspire to be like Jordan. Just pick up a lads mag and have a look. You forget there's a lot of morons out there

If you're the best at what you do then you're going to be a role model to somebody, of course you're still human flaws and all. I'm not really sure what you were trying to say there tbh

Fully agree with your second point.

Tony EH

Sleepy wrote: »

Question: how many of them are over the age of 30?

Some are approaching 40.

Tony EH

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

I'll admit that one but I'll stand by my point that slow moving zombies are simply not scary or unsettling in any way

Well, I find them terrifying and when the story is done correctly, it can be horrifying. 'Day of the Dead' (1985) being a perfect example. Such a relentlessly grim film and what should be the benchmark for all zombie flicks.

BaronVonBacon

Historical incorrectness for the sake of political correctness.

sunnysoutheast

BaronVonBacon wrote: »

Historical incorrectness for the sake of political correctness.

Indeed, Red Tails being à good récent example. A fascinating réal-life story dumbed down for PC purposes.

My pet peeve : Jeff Bridges. Just mumbles through every film hé's ever been in. Can only ever pick up half of what he says and i have à décent av setup.

Sleepy

Tony EH wrote: »

Some are approaching 40.

Then they're not girls, they're women who should know better but are clearly morons.

Quorum wrote: »

And I'd argue that parents should stop looking to strangers to blame for the behaviour of their offspring. There is nothing anyone can do about the behaviour of people in the public eye. So look to things you can actually change.

Once a child starts school, their chief influences are their peers rather than their parents. What a parent can do to counteract the influence of the media at this point becomes increasingly diminished.

Sure, I can tell my little girl that those women are "silly" and laugh at them with her, limit her exposure to this media, try my best to find a place in school for her in an area likely to have parents who think the same as me (i.e. where the kids should have had less exposure to this type of media) but it still seeps through. Even in the best areas, there are airheads who's idea of being a stay-at-home-parent means watching reality TV all day and gossiping with "the girls" (i.e. other stupid women) at the school gates about people who are famous for being famous that would look down on them were their paths ever to cross.

The only "solution" for a parent is home-schooling and that brings a whole raft of other problems into play: diminished social skills etc.

The owners of the media can influence what that media shows. We as a society (and yes, as parents) need to get away from the lowest common denominator crap broadcast by the likes of TV3 and, women particularly, need to think about the influence of the "trash mags" they enjoy unwinding with might have on their children: a young boy wouldn't be let near his Dad's copy of Playboy, why should young girls be let near the bitchfest of Now, More, etc?

JohnMarston

sunnysoutheast wrote: »

My pet peeve : Jeff Bridges. Just mumbles through every film hé's ever been in. Can only ever pick up half of what he says and i have à décent av setup.

Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. :cool:

Triangular

One thing from TV/Movies that annoys me, is when a scene changes and you can notice for a split second, that actor(s) paused as if they'd just heard ACTION.

For example your watching a scene, it changes, cue an actor standing with his hand hovering over a door handle for 1/1.5 seconds and then he proceeds to open the door. I'm always noticing it.

Felexicon

No one ever stubs a toe or gets clothes caught on a door handle.

JohnMarston

Everyone can type on a computer without once looking at the keyboard or making a mistake and backspacing

humbert

I hate it in movies where there are two completely unrelated plots going at once and you have no confidence that they'll ever merge back together.

Oh wait, no, that's this thread.

saralou2011

In war flims if a character shows someone a photo of their loved one you know they are going to die!

Quorum

Sleepy wrote: »

Once a child starts school, their chief influences are their peers rather than their parents. What a parent can do to counteract the influence of the media at this point becomes increasingly diminished.

Sure, I can tell my little girl that those women are "silly" and laugh at them with her, limit her exposure to this media, try my best to find a place in school for her in an area likely to have parents who think the same as me (i.e. where the kids should have had less exposure to this type of media) but it still seeps through. Even in the best areas, there are airheads who's idea of being a stay-at-home-parent means watching reality TV all day and gossiping with "the girls" (i.e. other stupid women) at the school gates about people who are famous for being famous that would look down on them were their paths ever to cross.

The only "solution" for a parent is home-schooling and that brings a whole raft of other problems into play: diminished social skills etc.

The owners of the media can influence what that media shows. We as a society (and yes, as parents) need to get away from the lowest common denominator crap broadcast by the likes of TV3 and, women particularly, need to think about the influence of the "trash mags" they enjoy unwinding with might have on their children: a young boy wouldn't be let near his Dad's copy of Playboy, why should young girls be let near the bitchfest of Now, More, etc?

TV stations show these things because they get the ratings, that's all they care about, especially commercial channels such as TV3. Likewise, a certain segment of the population likes to watch crap and there's nothing anyone can do about that. The two feed into one another.

And I wouldn't have been let read those magazine when I was young. See? Parental control.

Dalken

Adam Sandler

ScumLord

I watched two new American shows recently that are full of annoying Americanisms.

The first show was revolution, the plot line is all electrical things have stopped working, whats weird is that the shows creators think that the combustion engine is electrical. They're main reason for including the engine as far as I could see was that they wanted to go for a civil war era look to everything so they included many things that don't run on electricity. The show takes place 15 years after electricity stopped working (in appliances obviously if electricity stopped working nothing in the universe would work) but there's no need for them to go so deep into the science of things when it's Americans watching.

Of course even though they've been 15 years without electricity they all still wear designer clothes, have perfect teeth and have completely forgotten about steam engines.

The next show was an American version of the modern Sherlock Holmes. Holmes is a hipster type tattooed lad that watches TV and has sex with random women, where he finds time to learn all that Sherlock would know with his active lifestyle I don't know.

American TV and film creates stylish fantasy with very little effort put into plot and continuity. They reuse the same characters over and over, when they buy in a foreign character they rewrite all the uniqueness out of them and turn them into the standard American hero type.

MOC88

JohnMarston wrote: »

Thats true, the telltale sign was that they ran or sprinted. Dead people are subject to rigormortis.

Which reminds me of another thing that irks me, Zombies running in modern day adaptations.

The idea with 28 days later was that they would be abell to quickly hunt you down in packs as opposed to you out walking them and stabbing them in the head with a long stick. There is no outrunning - hteres always a threat and you can at best be one step ahead - you can't break for space
seriously one combine harvester could clear a town of walking zombies - heck did you ever see the tanks designed to clear mines - one of them alone could rip an entire city of zombies to shred in a day

anyways imdb considers it a zombie film which is good enough for me.

ANother annoying thing is when there are no reg. plates on cars- totally wrecks the scene -they have improved on it in recent years tbf

Tony EH

Dalken wrote: »

Adam Sandler

Rob Schneider

Mickeroo

MOC88 wrote: »

seriously one combine harvester could clear a town of walking zombies - heck did you ever see the tanks designed to clear mines - one of them alone could rip an entire city of zombies to shred in a day

If the head is still intact they're still dangerous, a trained marksman is the most effective weapon against zombies I assure you.

krudler

Felexicon wrote: »

No one ever stubs a toe or gets clothes caught on a door handle.

Lost In Translation. boom.

JohnMarston

Mickeroo wrote: »

If the head is still intact they're still dangerous, a trained marksman is the most effective weapon against zombies I assure you.

I remember that one scene in Dawn of the Dead remake where they were taking turns shooting a crowd of zombies from the shopping mall roof. Looked like fun

--Kaiser--

Tony EH wrote: »

Rob Schneider

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqLUbmpuVw4

Funglegunk

krudler wrote: »

Lost In Translation. boom.

And Will Smith stubs his toe at the beginning of Independence Day.

krudler

Funglegunk wrote: »

And Will Smith stubs his toe at the beginning of Independence Day.

this changes everything.

OldNotWIse

Sleepy wrote: »

I'd argue that it is the responsibility of anyone who owns a media platform to think of their younger viewers.

I think it's the responsibility of someone who wishes to create another human being to ensure that human being grows up with some kind of sense of self worth so that they are not going to auto-destruct if they see a celebrity mis-behaving.

kraggy

starbelgrade wrote: »

Any film starring Jim Carey or Adam Sandler.

Except Eternal Sunshine Of A Spotless Mind.

And The Truman Show.

upandcumming

Colmustard wrote: »

Very rarely you get something original, something like inception or The Matrix the reason studios won't take a chance, because of piracy they can't afford to,

LOL!

Arpa

mauzo wrote: »

The sex scenes. Almost everything about them.

Its just not realistic at all! Especially when the covers are up over her boobs, ffs nobody does that! Show me your boobs!

Or when characters have sex with their t-shirt/bra still on. Gimme a break. First thing coming off is your bra love

Tony EH

MOC88 wrote: »

seriously one combine harvester could clear a town of walking zombies - heck did you ever see the tanks designed to clear mines - one of them alone could rip an entire city of zombies to shred in a day

The mass of human flesh, sinew, tendons, cartilage and bone would stop a combine harvester dead, pretty quickly and again, you're stuck in a snack box. One of "Hobart's Funnies" (your flailing tank) may work, provided you could actually find one, it had enough fuel and you could drive it. It isn't like driving a car.

You see, you're making the classic mistake that everyone does in the films themselves. You're assuming that the problem can be dealt with, with ease and that attitude usually ends with people becoming lunch.

The thing with the living dead is that they don't stop, they don't think, you can't reason with them...and the never go away.

Arpa

Maybe somebody mentioned it already, but the most used line in all of movie script writing history is,

"I'm getting too old for this ****."

Now that you now it you'll find it in hundreds of movies and it will start to annoy you. You're welcome.

Mickeroo

Arpa wrote: »

Maybe somebody mentioned it already, but the most used line in all of movie script writing history is,

"I'm getting too old for this ****."

Now that you now it you'll find it in hundreds of movies and it will start to annoy you. You're welcome.

Indeed, although I would always associate it with Lethal Weapon more than anything.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAAw05J-6ek

AlmightyCushion

Arpa wrote: »

Maybe somebody mentioned it already, but the most used line in all of movie script writing history is,

"I'm getting too old for this ****."

Now that you now it you'll find it in hundreds of movies and it will start to annoy you. You're welcome.

It makes up about 90% of the lethal weapon script.

MOC88

Tony EH wrote: »

The mass of human flesh, sinew, tendons, cartilage and bone would stop a combine harvester dead, pretty quickly and again, you're stuck in a snack box. One of "Hobart's Funnies" (your flailing tank) may work, provided you could actually find one, it had enough fuel and you could drive it. It isn't like driving a car.

You see, you're making the classic mistake that everyone does in the films themselves. You're assuming that the problem can be dealt with, with ease and that attitude usually ends with people becoming lunch.

The thing with the living dead is that they don't stop, they don't think, you can't reason with them...and the never go away.

fog horn and big hole in the ground
I think I'm gonna go to the zombie survival thread soon
I just don't understand how a full armored unit with medium battle tanks could not survive but a small number of untrained civilians can? its jsut a gripe. I think if the zombies could run they could overwhelm before the problem is even realised if the infection spread fast enough but not if they could walk because by the time a force large enough to overwhelm the unit would be organised. This is why in resident evil you have massive abominatiosn that COULD take down armoured units etc.
while i'm on resident evil - poor game - movie adaptions annoy me a lot

Mickeroo

MOC88 wrote: »

fog horn and big hole in the ground
I think I'm gonna go to the zombie survival thread soon
I just don't understand how a full armored unit with medium battle tanks could not survive but a small number of untrained civilians can? its jsut a gripe. I think if the zombies could run they could overwhelm before the problem is even realised if the infection spread fast enough but not if they could walk because by the time a force large enough to overwhelm the unit would be organised. This is why in resident evil you have massive abominatiosn that COULD take down armoured units etc.
while i'm on resident evil - poor game - movie adaptions annoy me a lot

You need to read this ASAP: http://www.amazon.co.uk/World-War-Z-Max-Brooks/dp/0715637037/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1347032981&sr=1-1

OneArt

Jarren wrote: »

Watching actors who can't act (replying to original post )

Hint - Kristen Stewart performance in Snow White and the Huntsman.

Kristen Stewart was the only thing about that movie I didn't like.

Tony EH

MOC88 wrote: »

fog horn and big hole in the ground
I think I'm gonna go to the zombie survival thread soon
I just don't understand how a full armored unit with medium battle tanks could not survive but a small number of untrained civilians can? its jsut a gripe. I think if the zombies could run they could overwhelm before the problem is even realised if the infection spread fast enough but not if they could walk because by the time a force large enough to overwhelm the unit would be organised. This is why in resident evil you have massive abominatiosn that COULD take down armoured units etc.
while i'm on resident evil - poor game - movie adaptions annoy me a lot

What size hole are you talking about and how long would it take to dig, How many people needed, how would you maintain it etc. A fog horn luring the dead into a hole would quickly fail and then you have overwhelming numbers of the living dead on your doorstep....oops.

Everyone of your suggestions will fall flat on its face in the usual zombie apocalypse scenario, because of the sheer numbers involved against you.

Of course, in...erm...reality, the living dead, in any fashion, wouldn't be able to take over a state that uses its military to combat them. Of course, in the standard story, you have mass desertions as things go under, Army/police personnel will be worried about their own families etc and abandon their posts. That's the general rule in the zombie apocalypse story, is that the seemingly surmountable problem reaches a point of no return slowly through human incompetence and general fear. The living dead constantly add to their numbers through infection, while humanity constantly loses numbers and the infection is airborne and unavoidable. Anyone that dies, no matter how, becomes part of the ranks of the dead. According to the CIA, that's 150.000 people every day and that's under normal circumstances.

But, we're talking about film fiction here and without some latitude, you have no film. You have to accept the basic premise of the film, or you just don't watch it.

humbert

Tony EH wrote: »

What size hole are you talking about and how long would it take to dig, How many people needed, how would you maintain it etc. A fog horn luring the dead into a hole would quickly fail and then you have overwhelming numbers of the living dead on your doorstep....oops.

Everyone of your suggestions will fall flat on its face in the usual zombie apocalypse scenario, because of the sheer numbers involved against you.

Of course, in...erm...reality, the living dead, in any fashion, wouldn't be able to take over a state that uses its military to combat them. Of course, in the standard story, you have mass desertions as things go under, Army/police personnel will be worried about their own families etc and abandon their posts. That's the general rule in the zombie apocalypse story, is that the seemingly surmountable problem reaches a point of no return slowly through human incompetence and general fear. The living dead constantly add to their numbers through infection, while humanity constantly loses numbers and the infection is airborne and unavoidable. Anyone that dies, no matter how, becomes part of the ranks of the dead. According to the CIA, that's 150.000 people every day and that's under normal circumstances.

But, we're talking about film fiction here and without some latitude, you have no film. You have to accept the basic premise of the film, or you just don't watch it.

Grand Canyon, pre-made, very big. Just arrange some shrubs near the edge.

MOC88

Tony EH wrote: »

What size hole are you talking about and how long would it take to dig, How many people needed, how would you maintain it etc. A fog horn luring the dead into a hole would quickly fail and then you have overwhelming numbers of the living dead on your doorstep....oops.

Everyone of your suggestions will fall flat on its face in the usual zombie apocalypse scenario, because of the sheer numbers involved against you.

Of course, in...erm...reality, the living dead, in any fashion, wouldn't be able to take over a state that uses its military to combat them. Of course, in the standard story, you have mass desertions as things go under, Army/police personnel will be worried about their own families etc and abandon their posts. That's the general rule in the zombie apocalypse story, is that the seemingly surmountable problem reaches a point of no return slowly through human incompetence and general fear. The living dead constantly add to their numbers through infection, while humanity constantly loses numbers and the infection is airborne and unavoidable. Anyone that dies, no matter how, becomes part of the ranks of the dead. According to the CIA, that's 150.000 people every day and that's under normal circumstances.

But, we're talking about film fiction here and without some latitude, you have no film. You have to accept the basic premise of the film, or you just don't watch it.

Why would you make a hole where you live that would be fairly stupid??? you'd make multiple a bit of a distance away from you. Granted yes you would have desertions but many families live near the army bases near their soldiers.... even if they wouldn't you always have a hardcore fe in military that would stick together

Have you ever seen a digger - dig a hole?

well after the first week the number would be reduced by a lot due to all the deaths

of course you try and accept the premises of films but this thread is about things that bug you in a film ie. things that you find hard to accept
watch the night of the living dead- the ending points out how ridicolous walking dead are---

MOC88

Mickeroo wrote: »

You need to read this ASAP: http://www.amazon.co.uk/World-War-Z-Max-Brooks/dp/0715637037/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1347032981&sr=1-1

I have - the most interesting part is the interview with the blind man who learns to use swords against zombies and starts a movement in Japan... leading to the conclusion a long pointy stick - preferably metal could wipe out an infinite no. of dead from the safety of a second floor
you could kill dead quicker than they could animatewith a small team with little or no threat

course you could always visit a museum and take out preserved armour and go on a rampage with a longsword

opinion guy

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

It makes up about 90% of the lethal weapon script.

It also make up 90% of what I say when I have a hangover

The_Kew_Tour

How the bad guy always seems to miss gun shots with 1000 bullets and good guy kills with 1.

kowloon

There are two categories of gunshot victims in mainstream movies (with a few exceptions that prove the rule).

There are those that die instantly when shot, usually the extras, the henchmen types. There's no convulsions, punctured lungs or screaming, they're just dead. Real life is rarely so clean.

The other category, often reserved for major characters, are the ones who take hits and don't go down. They can shrug off a shot to the leg or shoulder. They can walk on a shattered leg and are unlikely to bleed out from severed blood vessels. If the initial shot is survived it's more than likely the character will be fine.

TLDR: You either die or you're okay. There's not much of a middle ground.

Tony EH

MOC88 wrote: »

Why would you make a hole where you live that would be fairly stupid??? you'd make multiple a bit of a distance away from you. Granted yes you would have desertions but many families live near the army bases near their soldiers.... even if they wouldn't you always have a hardcore fe in military that would stick together

Have you ever seen a digger - dig a hole?

well after the first week the number would be reduced by a lot due to all the deaths

of course you try and accept the premises of films but this thread is about things that bug you in a film ie. things that you find hard to accept
watch the night of the living dead- the ending points out how ridicolous walking dead are---

Actually, I think the ending of 'Night of the Living Dead' points out how ridiculous humans are.

The main protagonist who has spent the entire film fighting with the human characters ends up being killed by other humans. That's Romero's point. In the remake, Barbara suggests that they "...can just walk right by them" and yet, through bickering, infighting and a lack of co-operation, everyone ends up dead (in the original anyway).

It's the blase way that the human characters dismiss the living dead that leads to their own demise.

Mickeroo

MOC88 wrote: »

I have - the most interesting part is the interview with the blind man who learns to use swords against zombies and starts a movement in Japan... leading to the conclusion a long pointy stick - preferably metal could wipe out an infinite no. of dead from the safety of a second floor
you could kill dead quicker than they could animatewith a small team with little or no threat

course you could always visit a museum and take out preserved armour and go on a rampage with a longsword

You know, if there has to be some sort of apocalyse I hope its a zombie one. At least we'll get to have loads of fun with weapons before we kick it.

Reindeer

Mickeroo wrote: »

You know, if there has to be some sort of apocalyse I hope its a zombie one. At least we'll get to have loads of fun with weapons before we kick it.

Now yer gettin to understand the American gun laws a bit. Yer gonna die anyways, might as well have a bit of fun. And hey, maybe there'll be a Zombie apocalypse and we get to say "Told you so!".

Capt'n Midnight

donalg1 wrote: »

Well there is no way Butch and Sundance made it out alive those two are brown bread for sure.

Oddly enough
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butch_Cassidy#Claims_of_post-1908_survival

Capt'n Midnight

Cop shows where they go to arrest the really evil bad guy

Underlings are murdered without warning or regard to the law or Geneva convention (this gets me in war films too - just about acceptable in things like the Dirty Dozen where it is established that anything goes )

The petty criminal who has a change of heart and risks everything to put things right dies.


The bad guy is arrested

and you know a good lawyer could get him out due to lack of warrants or due process.

Tony EH

Reboots.

Mickeroo

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Oddly enough
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butch_Cassidy#Claims_of_post-1908_survival

THey made a sequel of sorts to Butch & Sundance in the last couple of years too actually: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1629705/

Yer_Wan

Hijpo wrote: »

"the neutrinos are mutating"

The Latinos are mutating.