what a pile of monkey squeeze! good lord, don't just fire those writers, Darwin them so they cannot breathe & reproduce!
SPOILER:
we're gonna crash the 'system' to steal all the monies! we'll be hella rich and no one can stop us!! fire sale ftw!!!
1) Fire proof rooms with all the data backed up on tape are held by any publically traded company. They have to repreot to their shareholders the company assests, so any money in or out is tracked and backed up. Besides that, depending on the contract, it's still enforceable for 2-7 ears depending on how it's set up. companies that go outta business even have to keep their records for several years past when they clsoe their doors - all data is backed up privately. Gov't backs it up only so they can tax you. doh! It's not critical until Apr. 15th every year!!
2) hello?? paper still exists and it's more legally binding than any computer. Just use your last bill or statement.
3) Most gov't computers all still mainframes from the 1950s!!! not some uber freeze tower becuase the PCs run hot, lmao.
4) Everything is so not centralized so you cannot crush the East coast with taking down 1 central location. More like 50, 100 or even more.
If I see a writer for this goob of steaming cow droppings, I will kick them in the shin !!!
fark.com could have had a better script written by their submitters than this thing, gah.
It's got Bruce Willis in it so it has to be good! I have seen Striking Distance no fewer than three times this month because that's what they're playing and replaying on Encore.
Bruce Willis could kick Chuck Norris' ass. There I said it.
It's a fun film if you turn in your brain before watching it. Trying to make sense of the plot or y'know, listening to any of the technical stuff is guaranteed to cause your brain to hate you and attempt self-destruction.
I liked it, the only thing that made me go "Ok that was retarded" was when
SPOILER:
he shot down the helicopter by launching a car at it.
But if for nothing else, it rocks because of Kevin Smith being in it! :P
C'mon Glip, that was the *ONLY* thing?!
SPOILER:
Bruce Willis driving the SUV up through the building and hitting the asian girl with it was perfectly normal?
Deflagration - Ungiggity - Jointpaper - Pö - Proctologist - Fantastical - Pandarica WoW - L a s t R i t e s - Firetree Too many to play, too little time to do it.
i was reminded of this plot when i saw the latest "Life" episode, where the main character purposefully spills a drink onto a keyboard, causing every monitor in the room to go haywire. The computer that the monitors were running from wasn't even in the room.
That's too bad. I think you're doing a real disservice to yourself if you're scared off of this movie because of some nitpicky comments about computers. LF0DH is a big, blow-em-up, action fest. If you like those, then this movie is perfect for you. If you want structured realism in computer and database representation, try to get your hands on a Microsoft training video.
That's too bad. I think you're doing a real disservice to yourself if you're scared off of this movie because of some nitpicky comments about computers. LF0DH is a big, blow-em-up, action fest. If you like those, then this movie is perfect for you. If you want structured realism in computer and database representation, try to get your hands on a Microsoft training video.
Also, Maggie Q is hot!
If you like blow ups and undestructible cops
SPOILER:
how many ribs should have been broken? I wonder...
go for it. I'd give it 3 out of 5 stars, just for Bruce Willis alone.
most movies do not break my suspense of belief, but the stuff I mentioed seriously pulled me out of the movie. /shrug and I've seen a ton of movies in my life and that's only the 2nd time that occured
I don't think "turn off your brain and have fun" is really the best response to people who find faults in movies. My brain is intimately involved in the movie watching process, and turning off my brain if a movie has bad writing is like asking me to plug my ears if it has a bad soundtrack, or to shut my eyes if it has bad camera work. If a movie's strengths outweigh its weaknesses, then by all mean say so, but if the people who made the movie decided to skimp on something, it's not my burden to ignore it.
That being said, I can appreciate the good parts of less than perfect movies. For example, Transporter 2 (a movie with an equally ridiculous plot) had a neat scene where the hero fights off a group of henchmen with a fire hose, then pins them against the wall by turning on the water after he tangled them in it. However, the scene where he notices a bomb stuck to the bottom of his car and decides to remove it by doing a barrel roll under a crane so that its dangling hook pulls the bomb off seconds before it explodes is ridiculous any way you want to slice it.
I watched the movie a few days ago. I did not realize there was this "story" thing? I saw boom boom then i saw more boom booms then there was this crazy acrobat guy that kept surviving that was badass then some more booms.
Well, I've seen a lot of movies that were total rubbish. However some of them were total rubbish in a fun sort of way. For instance me and my friends would never ever consider the Fantastic Four movies good, but that doesn't mean we didn't enjoy watching them in a Mystery Theater sort of way. We got some great deconstruction sessions out of those movies, picking to bits what didn't work and how the second movie should so have had Keanu Reeves voicing the Surfer.
Some movies are intellectually stimulating or emotionally heart-wrenching without becoming tacky or shining towers of the awesomeness that Hollywood can sometimes achieve... other movies you're guaranteed to remember only three things about it: Quality of the popcorn, size of the explosions, hideousness of the plot. Ok, I lied, four things if you're a guy, the fourth thing being whether or not the chick was hot and whether or not she got her kit off.
Sadly in this day and age if you can't in some capacity check your brain in at the entrance you're going to have to skip a LOT of movies. Most of the Hollywood blockbusters don't really make much sense.
When Gandalf comes back to life because he is a wizard and a demi-god, do you freak because that is illogical?
What they mean by "turn your brain off" is "turn your logic-machine off." There's no reason Live Free and Die Hard should be subject to any more laws of reality than Lord of the Rings. Fiction is fiction. Let it live in that world. You enter its world when you want to be entertained by it, not the other way around.
When Gandalf comes back to life because he is a wizard and a demi-god, do you freak because that is illogical?
What they mean by "turn your brain off" is "turn your logic-machine off." There's no reason Live Free and Die Hard should be subject to any more laws of reality than Lord of the Rings. Fiction is fiction. Let it live in that world. You enter its world when you want to be entertained by it, not the other way around.
I still have to disagree with you there. The word "logic" does not imply a Spock-like mindset, nor am I suffering from an inability to comprehend fiction. Just because something is fictional, it doesn't necessarily make it immune to logic or thought.
One big issue is internal consistency. Given the world that is introduced to you at the beginning of a story, does what happens later make sense? Often in bad monster movies, they establish the monster as an unstoppable killing machine, with it gleefully sneaking up upon and eviscerating everyone it comes across with lightning fast speed. So what does it do when it's the end of the movie and tries to kill the main character? It picks him up and sorta shakes him around ineffectually until the hero stabs it in the eye, gets loose, and kills the monster with some sort of explosion. The problem here is that for the entire movie, the monster's behavior was sneaking and eviscerating, and yet for the climactic battle, which it could have easily won by sneaking and eviscerating, it instead decides to grab and shake. Now if grabbing and shaking was its preferred method of killing, I'd be fine with it. They invented the monster, after all. But if it has never done that before, and only does it in the climactic battle, the only explanation is that it has some sort of 4th wall breaking instinct that tells it who the hero is. Why spend so much time showing us how this monster behaves, only to contradict it at the last minute?
When Gandalf comes back to life because he is a wizard and a demi-god, do you freak because that is illogical?
What they mean by "turn your brain off" is "turn your logic-machine off." There's no reason Live Free and Die Hard should be subject to any more laws of reality than Lord of the Rings. Fiction is fiction. Let it live in that world. You enter its world when you want to be entertained by it, not the other way around.
The phrase you and pretty much everyone else in the thread is looking for is "suspension of disbelief". You don't watch an action movie because you want realistic storylines and dialogue. You watch em cause things explode and people die and guns are being shot through 90% of the movie.
One big issue is internal consistency. Given the world that is introduced to you at the beginning of a story, does what happens later sense?
This makes alot of sense, especially as they mention it being a post 9/11 world and introduce probable events, then turn on a hairpin to impropable. They needed techie consultants for their writers.
The suspension of disbelief, gah, throw back to my acting 101 class! lol.
The author, actors, etc. expect it of the audience, but as mentioned, they cannot violate the rules of the story premise. Story based in reality stays in reality unless the author can justify it - Pan's Labrinth for example. As for cars flipping ec, I take it some have missed the extras from Death Proof where the stunts were real and godly.
When Gandalf comes back to life because he is a wizard and a demi-god, do you freak because that is illogical?
What they mean by "turn your brain off" is "turn your logic-machine off." There's no reason Live Free and Die Hard should be subject to any more laws of reality than Lord of the Rings. Fiction is fiction. Let it live in that world. You enter its world when you want to be entertained by it, not the other way around.
Yeeeah. There's one pretty big ****ing difference between those two moves its called genre. Also, there's another one called setting.
Die Hard is about a cop in the real world. Lord of the Rings is about elves and wizards in a fantasy world.
Fiction is not fiction. The Hunt for Red October is not Harry ****ing Potter.
Die Hard is not about a cop in the real world. Die Hard is about a cop in the Die Hard world. In our world, Nakatomi Plaza does not exist. Neither does Hans Grueber. Neither does John McClane. Similarly, in their world, the laws of physics as we know them do not exist, nor do the laws of human behavior, nor does the passage of time (ever notice how filmic time is *not* real time?--that should be a big tip-off that we've left the real world).
Yeah, honestly, if John McClane were a real cop, he would have been locked up hundreds of times over. Even if done in the cause of "good," murdering dozens/hundreds of bad guys does not let you keep your badge.
In the real world, he'd be up to his neck in paperwork, if he somehow managed to keep his job. Every bullet fired has a report filed. Can you even imagine that amount of paperwork?
I had all sorts of issues with the plot in the movie, but I turned off my brain, watched the explosions and pretty girls, and went "eh, it was worth a couple hours."
Unlike some movies (Catwoman, Starship Troopers 2) that I can't even justify the time it took to watch.
In the real world, he'd be up to his neck in paperwork, if he somehow managed to keep his job. Every bullet fired has a report filed. Can you even imagine that amount of paperwork?
Well there was a span of 12 years inbetween LFoDH and the last one. That's a lot of time to catch up on paperwork.
Strangely, everything in movies looks similar to scenery within a few hours drive of southern california.
Which is why when I want to go traveling to rare places like qatar I just go to southern california. If I want to see the worlds different architecture I then go to disney world.
