Suspension of Disbelief Unsuspended

So I’m watching a Clint Eastwood/Kevin Costner movie that I recorded off TV, A Perfect World, in which Costner plays an escaped convict who, along with another convict, are driving along a Texas highway in a '59 Chevy with a kidnapped kid being held as hostage. The movie is set in 1963 (made in 1993).

Costner is driving, and his conversation with the other convict in the back seat is shot from what would be outside the windshield. The audience can see the passing countryside through the passengers’ side windows and the rear window.

The gear-shift lever is in park.

Except during the same conversation and a punch to the other convict’s nose by Costner, when the scene is shot from the back seat and the gear lever is hidden by the front bench seat back support, which would be correct with the gear lever in drive. The camera angle returns to the car interior from the windshield and the car is in park again. This happens twice more before I delete the turkey.

I’ve seen movie mistakes before with cars — the matter-transmitted Volkswagen and magic hubcap in the Bullitt car chase, for instance. But a still-life car nailed to a stage with a revolving background, supposedly driving at speed while in park? Everyone from the actors to the production crew must have sleepwalked through that turkey.

I checked it out at imdb.com, where there’s a laundry list of Perfect World screwups. People *paid money * to watch that thing.

I, for one, am shocked and appalled. . . .

Little things bother you, don’t they?

The first time in my entire life I said “Its just a movie/TV show for fuck’s sake!” was when someone told me they could not believe how ridiculous Battlestar Galactica was because how did the ship still have bullets to fire. I think they even went over some battles in slo mo trying to count bullets fired by the Galactica.:rolleyes:

I find myself distracted and amused when a scene switches vantage point like that, and I notice a glass that’s full from front view but half empty from back view, or a character whose hands are clasped together when seen from the left, but spread out or pocketed from the right. I always figured it was the case of a film editor getting really tired late at night and not paying attention to continuity details. These things only irritate me when they pull me out of the movie, and that generally just happens when the movie is marginally decent anyway.

Frankly, if that sort of thing bothers you, you have no business watching movies portraying fiction, and should probably stay away from fiction in all forms. Stick with your National Geographic Documentaries, if you can avoid having them ruined by your own silly nitpicking.

I mean, it’s fun to see something like that, but for it to be anything other than an amusing bit of trivia, the viewer has to have a real problem understanding what “fiction” is.

My suspicion is that you’re not bringing this up not because of any real outrage about it, but just to show people how clever you were to spot it.

In the godawful King Arthur ripoff “First Knight,” Lancelot dramatically wins the battle with the evil bad king by knocking the jagged nasty looking sword out of his hands. The shot changes to a view of the sword as it’s sailing through the air, twisting end over end until it lands point-down in the dirt. The camera then turns back to Lancelot and the bad guy. The bad guy is wearing an expression of shocked disbelief as Lancelot runs him through, while he’s still holding the jagged nasty looking sword. He was still holding the goddamn sword! Arghhhhhhh! Fuck that movie!

Instead of thinking of it as “suspension of disbelief”, try on this concept:

Secondary Belief. It’s just the way things work in that particular universe.

It makes things like that more palatable.

[sub]thanks to JRRT for that[/sub]

Moved MPSIMS --> Cafe Society.

I saw a play once where the actors were supposed to be riding in a car, but the car was just four chairs! Took me right out of it.

I don’t mean to give the OP too much shit though, because you never know what little things are going to bug you in a film. Though it surely would have been less of an issue if the movie itself had been better. If Kenm stopped watching just because of the gearshift thing, he’s an OCD nutball – but I’ll wager he probably wasn’t enjoying it too much to begin with.

I suspect the editors know full well about most continuity gaffes like that, but they have to work with the footage they have. It becomes a balancing act between using the best takes and trying not to make the continuity errors too glaring. I’m sure compromises are made all the time, and 99% of them probably go completely unnoticed by the audience.

Revolving background? Much more likely it was being towed on a trailer.

to take the OP seriously for a moment - things can take you out of a movie that are not continuity errors or set dressing mistakes. In “Unforgiven” I lost it when Morgan Freeman’s character talks to Clint Eastwood about masturbating. (Eastwood is a widower. Freeman asks him something to the effect of do you use prostitutes or do you use your hand). Sorry, it just seemed like such an unreal piece of dialog.

That was what you didn’t like about the movie?

In the original Rocky Horror they did that. Except it was two chairs. And in Grease at the drive in, Danny drops the ring, it falls through the fake car onto the stage. He has to get out, climb under the car, and get it.

Agreed.

Hardly outraged, which is why I had posted in MPSIMS. Now I’m shocked and appalled all over again.

The first one that comes to mind for me (and probably a lot of others) is Legolas skateboarding down the stairs. I need to stop and erase that from my brain before I can get myself back into the movie.

In the Tom & Jerry cartoon Invisible Mouse, Jerry is pursued by Tom and dives head first into a full bottle of invisible ink, yet when he emerges it’s his bottom half which is invisible. How is anyone expected to finish the cartoon after that?

Think to yourself
“It’s just a show
I should really just relax.”

Why does The Neverending Story have closing credits, dammit?!

In 2001, when Heywood Floyd is riding to the space station, he drinks juice with a straw from a closed container. When he stops sipping, the juice falls back down the straw. Even when I first saw this as a teenager, I was pretty sure that wouldn’t happen in the absence of gravity. It didn’t affect my appreciation of the whole movie, though. The quality of the movie might have something to do with how much it bothers you.

Oh why did you have to bring that up? I’d forgotten about that particular travesty, and I’m planning a weekend in watching the set after not seeing them in a couple of years.. I’m looking forward to it just a little less now. I’m already having to deal with the impending Avalanche of Skulls[sup]tm[/sup], which no amount of time will fully scour from my brain.