does your level of expertise in a certain subject affect how you watch films/ play games etc

[Belaam]

Alien planets that don't seem to follow basic evolution. I am in no way a biologist, but I know enough about basic evolution to know that, for example, all vertebrates on earth have a somewhat similar bone structure with four limbs (with the rear two merging for the aquatic animals). There is no reason that life on other planets wouldn't have similar evolutionary paths, but if different, all vertebrates on the planet should share that difference.

For instance, Avatar drove me nuts on this. Every freaking mammalian species on the planet has six limbs... except for one. I kept waiting for the reveal that the Na'vi were also alien to the planet, but no dice.

George Lucas is particularly bad on that one as well. His planets tend to be populated by species that couldn't possibly be related to each other.

Also, I spent one summer helping a theater buddy set up the lighting for a small college theater. When we were done, we headed to Vegas for a weekend to celebrate and I caught myself in strip clubs trying to see what kind of lights they were using and how they were positioned.

 

[Sanshou]

Being someone heavily involved in various martial arts I find it impossible to watch many martial arts films without the use of several facepalms. However it means that when I find some of the few gems (like the 36th Chamber of Shaolin) they're amazing to watch.

 

[Davey Woo]

Since studying computers and programming I've becme much more aware of why some games may have issues or quirks and that it's not necessarily because 'the game is broken'.

I've foudn i spend a lot of my time explaining to friends why things happen in a game a certain way, and why it isn't as easy as 'just changing it'.

 

[Jeff Gennick]

Yes, whenever I play a game or watch a movie, I critique computers, robots, or how people fire a bow.

I was impressed with BBC's Robin Hood, the first episode he shot with relatively good form.

 

[PleaseDele]

Well, I usually cringe when the mechanics of anything are being explained. I do feel writers should have some bullshit mechanic for superpoweres/space-travel whatever-da-f*** your plot device is. You need rules to create yoru work by. But for the love of gawd don't explain them, you're gonna get stuff wrong.

Otherwise, I'm just gonna roll with whatever bullcrap that is happening. Including the wrongly lip-synched musical instruments.

Being a musician I did find something else. A positive twist on the main question. I feel I enjoy games and movies much more because of the music. If I hear an audi ocue or just background music, it always draws my attention. You'd think this would be an immersion breaker, but it actually pulls me in. I'll be busy trying to figure out whaqt kind of vibe is being introduced and I'll play along with that.

I was channel surfing the otherday and this horse race was about to happen. Some sweet Celldweller music was played in the background and I figured: hey, let's race. Gimme some action!

Or possibly a slow-mo action scene with dramatic music. Preferably with people dying on screen.

Music like this is often used tacky as hell, but I love tacky, so bring it.

 

[INVALIDUSERNAME]

For me, it's whenever a film or a TV show has someone playing a video game, and they're usually bobbing and weaving back and forth spamming buttons really fast, and using archaic terminology from the 1980s to describe what's going on in the game. They're wrapping their fingers around the controller pushing every single button over and over, and it just looks ridiculous.

 

[soren7550]

Thanks to my forensics class, crime shows are ruined for me forever(not that I liked them in the first place).
"You're doing that procedure wrong."
"That's contaminated now."
"That takes longer to do and process."
"You're supposed to be wearing hazmat gear, not high heels and a low cut top."
Stuff like that.

Also, thanks to my (sparse-ish) medical knowledge, that ruins some more shows/movies for me.
"You should be dead/immobile/in incredible pain right now."
"You can't do it like that."
"That's not what X injury/disease/etc. dose."

Same kind of applies to weapons. A bad one for that was Black Ops. If I remember right, a third of the weapons in that weren't even made in the time period it takes place in. Not to mention the rest of its stupidness.

 

[A_Parked_Car]

Well, I'm a military history major (graduate school hopeful) who is focusing on the Second World War. Therefore, many games, TV shows and movies etc. can REALLY get on my nerves. 99% of military history documentaries are complete bullshit for example. Certain movies and mini series/TV shows can be really offensive too, although some are pretty good (The Pacific, Band of Brothers, Letters from Iwo Jima and such).

As for games, there are tons of problems with how a lot of them play out, just like movies. That and they tend to perpetuate a lot of myths. For example, I will be extremely irritated with Company of Heroes 2 if the Germans are using long barrel Panzer IVs during Operation Barbarossa. It takes about one nanosecond of research to see that the vast majority of German armour in 1941 were either the okay (although obsolete) Mark IIIs, plenty of Mark IIs and even Mark Is. They had just begun the process of up-gunning the few Panzer IVs they had from the short barrel 75s to the long barrel versions that people think of. I will have a freaking heart-attack if I even see a Panther or Tiger when it is supposed to be 1941.

That isn't even talking about the whole "only the winter beat the Germans" myth that has been curb-stomped in academic circles (and among anyone that knows anything about the Eastern Front) for years. Operation Barbarossa was in serious trouble long before winter arrived, mostly due to extremely poor German planning and logistics, along with much higher-than-expected Soviet resistance. Although winter did play a role, (though a smaller one than people think) if they have to obsess over a particular facet of the weather they should deal with the rasputisa.

 

[Erja_Perttu]

snip!

Not sure The Princess Bride fight counts for two reasons:

1. It is the boy's imagination. He doesn't know swordfighting or fencing techniques, so he just images something right out of PotC or the Errol Flynn oeuvre.

2. They aren't fighting for real. They are both master swordsmen who are enjoying themselves and enjoying having a chance to stretch their talents. Inigo outright admits that he doesn't like fighting full force because it's over too quickly, and Westley acknowledges him as an artist of his craft, so why fight seriously?

INIGO: You are using Bonetti's defense against me, eh?

MAN IN BLACK: I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain.

INIGO: Naturally, you must expect me to attack with Capo Ferro.

MAN IN BLACK: Naturally. But I find that Thibault cancels Capo Ferro, don't you?

INIGO: Unless the enemy has studied his Agrippa... which I have!

Also, the moves they talk are real (to a degree), Bonneti was a real swordsman who taught defense and waiting for your opponent to make a mistake, Capo Ferro taught a much more linear type of fencing, Thibault used Spanish fencing which cancelled out jabbing attacks, and Agrippa is sometimes regarded as the man who defined the rapier as a thrusting weapon as well as a cutting weapon.

However, while the terms are real and to an extent using Thibault's method against Capo Ferro's would cancel them out, the moves they are doing are utterly unrelated (see above re: boy doesn't actually know swordfighting moves)[/quote]

Fantastic! you really seem to know our stuff. Interesting thing knowing that, if not the swordplay itself, then the dialogue was well thought through.

Ha! That's practically increased my enjoyment of that film - goodo!

 

[zumbledum]

exploding cars in films.. does my head in every time! petrol is not an explosive, and the way they always remove the engine/drive train and a lot of other stuff and you see some shell of a car doing a totally impractical flip.

and every single time someone uses the phrase survival of the fittest, because its never ever used correctly.

 

[Rose and Thorn]

My expertise in hating people effects my day to day interactions with people. Go figure.

 

[dimensional]

Spoiler: for space

I am a practitioner of ninjutsu, and I really can't help but notice how incorrectly ninjas or their arts are portrayed in movies and video-games. Say, TMNT. Or for example, games like perhaps Mortal Kombat.

Sorry that cracked me up I think I get what you are saying but those are some terrible examples what ninjutsu being shown incorrectly in TMNT or Mortal Kombat WTH are they playing at and they are so believable otherwise. Everyone knows real ninjas wear orange and talk about friendship all the time anyway.

I would say that most fight scenes of any kind are misrepresented in films and games though as real fights are generally not as entertaining to watch as well as being a hell of a lot shorter I just deal with it and enjoy the ride even though I know it is complete bullshit. Even a real portrayal of a fighting style is extended most of the time as well as carefully choreographed (obviously) to provide a spectacle and a showcase of ability rather than as a literal depiction of an actual fight.

You can laugh as much as you like. However, you are laughing at a fact. Technically, there is nothing that is even remotely tied to ninjutsu in my examples. And no, those are not terrible examples. Those examples are examples of media where ninjas are a big part of the world. And yet they aren't even ninjas. Only by name. Ninjutsu is meant to be subtle, quiet, practical and not as flashy as it is presented. And when it comes to combat, ninjutsu is very simple. Real ninjas do not do a thousand flips and then dance on their fingers before killing an opponent. That is retarded. Flips are a part of ninjutsu, yes, but they are used for something else entirely.

You also said that it is altered in movies and games to look more entertaining. That is true. That's exactly what the thread is about. It's asking you about your thoughts when a subject that you know of appears differently on-screen.

So, I still stand by what I said. There is nothing ninja about ninjas in media.

I know what you mean what I was saying was you are arguing is that turtles being mutated into anthropomorphic creatures by magic ooze and being tutored by a rat and calling themselves ninjas arent actually ninjas which I thought was pretty obvious, that cartoon has no basis in reality whatsoever I really dont think they care if they misrepresent ninjas.

As for Mortal Kombat the ninjas throw ice are undead or cyborgs etc and can turn themselves into smoke teleport etc I dont think they were exactly going for a realistic approach either in fact I would go so far as to say they dont misrepresent ninjas really as these characters are obviously not ninjas in any way shape or form except in their own universe.

Calling these particular examples out as saying they are not indicative and true of real life ninjas is like saying the sky is blue, its obvious they are not representative of true ninjitsu or anything else as its all made up you dont have to study ninjitsu or any particular fighting style to see that.

Thats all I was saying Ninjas are certainly misrepresented but in those examples you dont have to know jack shit about ninjas to know that what you are seeing on screen is maybe not grounded in reality.

 

[ScruffyMcBalls]

It has been mentioned once or twice so far I think, but I'll just throw my two cents into the bowl here:
Guns.
Fucking guns... First off, suppressors do NOT work that way, they do NOT silence the shot and they do NOT just screw on to the muzzle of any pistol you happen to have in your pocket. The ONLY exception that I'll accept right off the bat is the Walrod pistol, whenever I see that being used correctly I always squee with joy (sad but this is what I've been reduced to).
Secondly, you do not have to cock the hammer, pump the shotgun or pull the slide before you fire in every situation. Heck, depending on the gun, all of these are done for you!
Thirdly, equal and equivalent exchange. People don't fly backward when struck with a bullet, unless you're watching Angel Cop, in which case that's totally fine because the handgun throws the user two feet through solid concrete whenever they fire it.
Oh, and also anything to do with being wounded and how you treat that wound. For one thing, a knife wound doesn't just stop bleeding because the scene is over, being stabbed in the arm can kill you, so put a fucking belt around it or something!

Asides those two, being a writer, into 3D modelling and having a passing interest in physics teams up to pretty much ruin everything ever produced by humankind. Unless it's Hard Boiled, or anything by Chow Yun Fat for that matter. The man is a god, his logic is final.

 

[Pinkamena]

Weeell...
I happen to be a physicist. So I often catch more "hollywood physics" in movies than your average man would. Normally, I shrug it off, as it is not important, nor have any major significance for the film. I am however bothered when they try to explain something physics related in a movie, and all they're saying is complete fucking gibberish. That can REALLY destroy my enjoyment of a movie.

 

[The_Waspman]

While I'm not an expert on it or anything, I've read a lot about science, and so any time a movie gets science wrong I die a little inside. I'm not talking about sci-fi or anything either, because that gets a free pass (unless its trying to be accurate), but really just the basics.

Watch pretty much any Roland Emmerich movie to understand what I'm talking about. Isn't it that godawful 2012 where a supposed Physics professor states 'The nutrino's are decaying.' or something like that? Did anyone on the production even look at a fucking science book?

Then again, this is the same film where LA disintergrates, The Worlds continents all shift a few thousand miles (wtf?) which means that cellphones no longer work (again, wtf?) and yet two scenes later, hey! People talking on their mobile phones!

So yeah, pretty much 2012. Sums up everything Hollywood gets wrong about science.

 

[FalloutJack]

Uhhh, no.

Everything I've acquired in my years at college do not tend to ruin stuff for me...because I am a writer, and I believe in the fun of the story, the amusement of narrative, and the wonder of WHY NOT. I have a good suspension of disbelief in that sense. Except when the game cheats. That's just dirty.

But suspension of disbelief just means you will accepted, that a guy can fly, or that aliens lived on mars. It don't mean you have to accept that some guy reversed the magnetic poles of earth and caused a tilde wave, or that taking off a helmet in space will make your head turn to ice in a second. Superman flying falls under suspension of disbelief, Superman catching some guy falling 5ft before he hits the ground going 100mph and not braking the guys spine dose not.

Fella, I watch Doctor Who. You have no idea what my capacity is.

"Just reapeat to yourself, it's just a show. I should really just relax."

 

[shootthebandit]

I suppose my expertise in movies affects how I watch movies. For example, I was with my girlfriend when I saw a trailer for a film called The Sessions about a quadriplegic paying a woman to take his virginity. I gradually thought to myself, "wait, I read this" because I had seen a very similar true life essay. Sure enough, immediately after I said that out loud, it flashed "based on a true story." And then there were one or two lines about "only six sessions" and "I think I'm falling for her." And I was like "That's bullshit. That wasn't in the essay." I then proceeded to lay out the entire three act structure of the movie and how it would exactly play out. I said "Guess we don't have to see that movie now."

ive heard that story before, this video explains this story better than any film could http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVqv6E0bBnI

 

[Hoplon]

While I'm not an expert on it or anything, I've read a lot about science, and so any time a movie gets science wrong I die a little inside. I'm not talking about sci-fi or anything either, because that gets a free pass (unless its trying to be accurate), but really just the basics.

Watch pretty much any Roland Emmerich movie to understand what I'm talking about. Isn't it that godawful 2012 where a supposed Physics professor states 'The neutrino's are decaying.' or something like that? Did anyone on the production even look at a fucking science book?

Then again, this is the same film where LA disintergrates, The Worlds continents all shift a few thousand miles (wtf?) which means that cellphones no longer work (again, wtf?) and yet two scenes later, hey! People talking on their mobile phones!

So yeah, pretty much 2012. Sums up everything Hollywood gets wrong about science.

Mutate, "the Neutrinos are mutating" I think neutrino decay is a real thing in radioactive decay (a neutrino is given off)

 

[The_Waspman]

Mutate, "the Neutrinos are mutating" I think neutrino decay is a real thing in radioactive decay (a neutrino is given off)

Oh thats right! Sorry, I pretty much tried to blank as much of that film as possible. Yeah, the neutrinos are mutating, which just makes... so... little... sense...