Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Hollywood Stupid

For anyone who might want to have a side conversation...you're welcome here!
Re: Hollywood Stupid
Post by Imaginos1892   » Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:34 am

Imaginos1892
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1263
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:24 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

doug941 wrote:Can Pierce singing be any worse than Clint Eastwood AND Lee Marvin both singing in the same film?

Yes. He was. Much worse.

And don't forget Ray Walston! Yep, Uncle Martin the Martian himself.

I was surprised how well Clint Eastwood pulled that off, and Lee Marvin was just right in 'The First Thing Ya Know'. At least both of them were on key.

Paint Your Wagon was a hoot!

"His arm's broke."
"You a doctor?"
"Horse doctor, but bones is bones."

Daryl wrote:Ultimate recent Star Wars stupidity was using gravity bombs to attack star ships in deep space.

If you took all the Hollywood Stupid out of that movie, you'd wind up with a trailer. A short one. There is only ONE way to arm the bombs, and it's a little remote-control dongle that's easy to drop, and lose? In the middle of a battle? The bombs can't be automatically armed when they're released, like every missile in the U.S. inventory?
———————————
"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom Of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts! Tell me, is there anyone along our borders with whom we are not at war?"
Top
Re: Hollywood Stupid
Post by Michael Everett   » Sat Nov 02, 2019 10:08 am

Michael Everett
Admiral

Posts: 2404
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:54 am
Location: Bristol, England

Daryl wrote:Ultimate recent Star Wars stupidity was using gravity bombs to attack star ships in deep space.

Imaginos1892 wrote:If you took all the Hollywood Stupid out of that movie, you'd wind up with a trailer. A short one. There is only ONE way to arm the bombs, and it's a little remote-control dongle that's easy to drop, and lose? In the middle of a battle? The bombs can't be automatically armed when they're released, like every missile in the U.S. inventory?

Two words. Rian Johnson.
He declared it was his intent to subvert expectations. I expected a watchable movie. He subverted those expectations amazingly.
Check out this analysis of the Throne Room Fight as opposed to this analysis of the Mustafar Battle.
Rian didn't care.
He just didn't care.
~~~~~~

I can't write anywhere near as well as Weber
But I try nonetheless, And even do my own artwork.

(Now on Twitter)and mentioned by RFC!
Animal Crossing Dreams at 6E00-00F5-2891
Top
Re: Hollywood Stupid
Post by Imaginos1892   » Sat Nov 02, 2019 10:44 am

Imaginos1892
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1263
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:24 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

Michael Everett wrote:Two words. Rian Johnson.

If there was any justice in the world, that wanker would be run out of Hollywood on a rail. "You! You made Star Wars SUCK! That takes ANTI-talent!"

Unfortunately, no matter how many people hated it, a lot of them watched it, so it pulled in a shitload of money. That is defined as success. Johnson will now be rewarded as a successful Star Wars director.

And there was a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of fans cried out in horror, and were suddenly silenced.
———————————
Vir: “What do I want? What do I want? I’d like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come at too high a price. I would gaze up into your lifeless eyes and wave, like this.” [grins and waggles fingers of his right hand] “Can your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?”
Top
Re: Hollywood Stupid
Post by vovchara   » Wed Nov 06, 2019 8:34 am

vovchara
Lieutenant (Junior Grade)

Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 4:15 am
Location: Germany

Dilandu wrote:
Mycall4me wrote: Why?


Because it is space. On Earth, fighter and battleship operated in different mediums: fighter in air (easy to move through, but required a lot of energy to stay in), battleship in water (hard to move through, but easy to stay in)

But in space, both fighter and battleship are in common medium. They are subjected to similar laws of dynamic. There are little to no practical reasons, why space battleship could not have similar dynamic characteristics as space fighter: acceleration, specific impulse, ect.

Also, there is no horizon in space. And no atmosphere to disperce the infrared radiation. The fighters approach would be visible by opponents right from the moment fighters ignited their engines. And long-range warfare in space is dominated by lasers and heavy missiles - the kind of weapons that fighters aren't suited to use due to their small size and limited mass.

Finally, the fighters in space are forced to compete with long-range missiles. Which are more effective by definition. The terror of rocket equation clearly states that we need propellant to accelerate a propellant. And fighter need to accelerate more then missile:

Let's just calculate, assuming that we need N ton of propellant to accelerate ton of mass to the desired speed:

A - Fighter accelerated to close with target - need N tons of propellant
B - Fighter deccelerated after attck run - need another N ton of propellant and 2N tons of propellant to accelerate this additional propellant at stage A. In total, 4N tons of propellant
C - Fighter need to accelerate back toward his home base - another N ton of propellant. So another 2N tons added on stage B and 4N tons on stage A. In total, 11N tons of propellant.
D - Fighter need to deccelerate near his home base - another N tons of propellant (another 2N tons of stage C, another 4N tons of stage B, and freaking 8N tons on A).

In total our fighter needed 24N tons of propellant to make his dashing raid and return.

Now lets look at missile of the same mass:

A - missile accelerated to close with target - need N tons of propellant.

That's all. The missile is 24 times more efficient than fighter.

Actually, with correct calculations - not those simplified - the missile would be even MORE efficient.


yep, exactly this.
But there is something else. When you fire 100 missiles at a targe and only 2 get through and kill it, this is worth the effort.
But if you fire 100 fighters at a target and 50 get through...
Top
Re: Hollywood Stupid
Post by Joat42   » Wed Nov 06, 2019 9:21 am

Joat42
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1530
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 6:01 am
Location: Sweden

vovchara wrote:..snip..
yep, exactly this.
But there is something else. When you fire 100 missiles at a target and only 2 get through and kill it, this is worth the effort.
But if you fire 100 fighters at a target and 50 get through...

Depending on the goal, losing 50 fighters may be an "acceptable" loss when you can't attack your target directly with missiles etc.

---
Jack of all trades and destructive tinkerer.


Anyone who have simple solutions for complex problems is a fool.
Top
Re: Hollywood Stupid
Post by Dilandu   » Wed Nov 06, 2019 12:27 pm

Dilandu
Admiral

Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 12:44 pm
Location: Russia

Joat42 wrote:Depending on the goal, losing 50 fighters may be an "acceptable" loss when you can't attack your target directly with missiles etc.


Problem is, that its gard to imagine such situation. Basically the only advantage fighter have over long-range missile is the human input. So, the situation must involve decision-making, that - due to some reason - could not be done remotely.

Problem is, that fighter by definition are short-endurance units. They could not get really far from their base, and could not stay long in space. So, its hard to imagine fighter in situation, when the remote decision-making would be impossible.
------------------------------

- Who would won in battle between strawman Liberal-Democrat and strawman Conservative-Republican?
- Scarecrow from Oz; he was strawman before it became political.

P.S. - And he have Russian twin, to watch his back)
Top
Re: Hollywood Stupid
Post by doug941   » Fri Nov 08, 2019 7:42 pm

doug941
Commander

Posts: 176
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 5:21 pm

Dilandu wrote:
Joat42 wrote:Depending on the goal, losing 50 fighters may be an "acceptable" loss when you can't attack your target directly with missiles etc.


Problem is, that its gard to imagine such situation. Basically the only advantage fighter have over long-range missile is the human input. So, the situation must involve decision-making, that - due to some reason - could not be done remotely.

Problem is, that fighter by definition are short-endurance units. They could not get really far from their base, and could not stay long in space. So, its hard to imagine fighter in situation, when the remote decision-making would be impossible.


Hollywood stupid with spacecraft? Flying along with engines at full speed ahead yet going at the same speed.
Top
Re: Hollywood Stupid
Post by Michael Everett   » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:54 am

Michael Everett
Admiral

Posts: 2404
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:54 am
Location: Bristol, England

doug941 wrote:Hollywood stupid with spacecraft? Flying along with engines at full speed ahead yet going at the same speed.

And to counter that, see the [quote=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OO6NTx92J18]Starfury[/quote] from Babylon 5.
Sure, the entire concept is not feasible when you actually think about it, but from a cinematic viewpoint, the Starfury is far more realistic than the Colonial Viper, the X-Wing/TIE Fighter or the fighter from Buck Rogers among many, many examples*.
And in episodes which do feature them, you see their engines activate only when they need to alter their vectors (Accelerate, decelerate etc etc).

*I am ignoring the Andromeda Slip-fighter for this as they are specifically stated to be based on non-human tech and created by a non-human race.
Shame about Andromeda,he series started quite well, was fairly entertaining for a couple of seasons (with a story arc, even!), then it went weirdly mystical which sorta ruined it for me.
~~~~~~

I can't write anywhere near as well as Weber
But I try nonetheless, And even do my own artwork.

(Now on Twitter)and mentioned by RFC!
Animal Crossing Dreams at 6E00-00F5-2891
Top
Re: Hollywood Stupid
Post by TFLYTSNBN   » Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:13 pm

TFLYTSNBN
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1711
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:58 am

Imaginos1892 wrote:
doug941 wrote:Can Pierce singing be any worse than Clint Eastwood AND Lee Marvin both singing in the same film?

Yes. He was. Much worse.

And don't forget Ray Walston! Yep, Uncle Martin the Martian himself.

I was surprised how well Clint Eastwood pulled that off, and Lee Marvin was just right in 'The First Thing Ya Know'. At least both of them were on key.

Paint Your Wagon was a hoot!

"His arm's broke."
"You a doctor?"
"Horse doctor, but bones is bones."

Daryl wrote:Ultimate recent Star Wars stupidity was using gravity bombs to attack star ships in deep space.

If you took all the Hollywood Stupid out of that movie, you'd wind up with a trailer. A short one. There is only ONE way to arm the bombs, and it's a little remote-control dongle that's easy to drop, and lose? In the middle of a battle? The bombs can't be automatically armed when they're released, like every missile in the U.S. inventory?
———————————
"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the Kingdom Of Idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts! Tell me, is there anyone along our borders with whom we are not at war?"



The highlight was Lee Marvin ripping the clothes off Jill Ireland.

One of the funniest movies ever. The less than spectacular singing did not detract from that.
Top
Re: Hollywood Stupid
Post by Imaginos1892   » Sun Nov 10, 2019 11:06 am

Imaginos1892
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1263
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:24 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

TFLYTSNBN wrote:The highlight was Lee Marvin ripping the clothes off Jill Ireland.

That's strange, Jill Ireland is not mentioned anywhere on the back of my Paint Your Wagon DVD. Jean Seeberg is there, right after Lee Marvin and Clint Eastwood.

It also says 'Featuring the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band' which I'd never noticed before.

You neglected to mention that she pulled a gun on him and told him to act like a man instead of an animal. And after some thought, he allowed that she was right.
———————————
No Name City
No Name City
God don't like it here…
Top

Return to Free-Range Topics...