Or in other words, movies where the action lags the least, or with the highest ratio of running time to action- none of that five minute break for the hero to interact with his family bullshit. 
Movies where there’s little if any obvious time to get up and use the bathroom. Two that I can think of are The Fugitive and The Day of the Jackal (a damn near perfect film, btw).
Could a kindly mod please move this to Cafe Society? :smack:
I don’t recall much down time in Hard Boiled. But it’s been a while since I’ve seen it…
All the Indiana Jones films fall into this category. There are few breaks, and one action sequence leads to the next - the films feel (as I’m sure they were intended to) like those 1940’s action serials with the intervening week between chapters snipped out.
:Moves thread from IMHO to Cafe Society just in time to avoid being engulfed by the giant fireball:
Nick of Time takes place in real time.
That’s interesting that you’d call The Day of the Jackal an action movie with no downtime - it’s one of my favorite movies but most people seem to hate it because it’s so slow moving.
I nominate Speed - we don’t even know if Keanu Reeves has a family in it.
The Bourne movies are pretty intense straight through.
Not action, but suspense. While there was not a lot in the way of explosions and car chases, pretty much the entire time was spent on Fox’s plotting and preparation and the people pursuing him- you don’t have much screen time not involving the main event and the lead up to it- at least I don’t remember much, I haven’t seen it in ages. Plus it was paced well.
One of my all-time favorite films (and books), as I’ve noted in another current thread. And I HAVE seen it recently. There’s almost nothing not dire ctly related to the actions of The Jackal, or of the OAS that hired him, or of Claude Lebel, the Commissaire stuck with the task of catching him (or of the British Intelligence agents who end up getting the bulk of the good intel on him. It’s not that they do the bulk of the work – it’d be boring to show Lebel’s gruntwork that had to be done, but yielded nothing. It’s just that the Brits were the ones who had the critical information, te sexy part.)
Whjat’s great about TDotL is that it has the most realistic feel of any susense/thriller. Nothing seems artificially inflated or exagerrated. You see the killer going about his careful planning, although you don’t know exactly what it is he’s doing. He gets his specialized equipment, but it’s not from a glitzy “Q”, and the stuff isn’t outlandish. By the end of the film you’re rooting for both The Lackal (because of his cleverness and willingness to go on, even after his cover is blown) and for Lebel (for his doggedness, and because he’s in the moral right).
The gunshots and durations seem realistically muted, not drawn-out, and the only hint of exagerration is the way the Jackal’s body gets thrown against the wall when he’s shot. It’s still more restrained than you’d see in another action movie, and the scene isn;t artificially lengthened, or dramatically scored.
The original version of The Hitcher with Rutger Hauer. I haven’t seen, nor do I intend to see, the remake. The original is absolutely unrelenting.
Crank is pretty much non-stop action. As one of the plot summaries on the imdb page says:
So he’s out trying to get vengeance, and when he’s not beating down the bad guys, he’s trying to keep his adrenaline up in ridiculous ways.
“Shoot 'em Up” with Clive Owen. Might still be in theaters, depending. Totally over the top, you never really have a chance to breathe.
Classic line from Paul Giamatti: “Do we suck, or is he really that good?”
I came in here to mention this movie. Now, mind you, it’s Olympic-level stupid as a movie…but it is, literally, non-stop action.
Almost as action packed (and almost as stupid) is the new Clive Owen vehicle, Shoot 'Em Up, also starring Paul Giamatti and (rowr) Monica Bellucci. It’s probably still in some theaters.
ETA: curse you, kurilla. :mad: 
“Over the top” doesn’t begin to describe a movie where the hero kills the bad guy by projecting bullets from holes in his hand, heated from a fireplace- did I really see that? 
Although the time it takes for mercury to amalgamate with lead is somewhat stretched (putting Day of the Jackal on my"geat movies not to be watched with a gun enthusiast" list)
You’re going to have to explain that.
As Forsyth explains it in his book DotJ, the mercury in the explosive bullets works in a mechanical fashion – the deceleration of the lead bullet doesn’t affect the mercury (or glycerin, which his “Armourer” claims is a possible substitute) within, so the mercury tries to keep going, crashes into the interior wall of the lead bullet it’s inside, and causes it to fragment and fly apart. It doesn’t “explode” by any chemcal means, but is driven apart by mechanical forces.
Of course, Forsyth might be copletely wrong about how such explosive bullets work – I know that the explanation he gives of an Image Intensifier Tube in another book is completely wrong (but optics is my specialty), so it wouldn’t surprise me if he erred in this as well. But, as he explains it, there is no amalgamation n going on.
The problem with the mercury-filled lead bullets is that mercury amalgamtes with lead pretty quickly, leaving you with a metalic slush. Basically, the moment you put them together your bullets begin to self destruct. They aren’t likely to be particularly accurate, either, as the amalgamation may not take place evenly inside the cavity.
Also, mercury is pretty destructive to aluminum. If the gun you are using has aluminum parts and gets mercury contaminated, it’s not going to be A Good Thing.
definitely no aluminum on The Jackal’s gun, as Forsyth describes it, so that’s not an issue (Nor on the tubes enclosing it, although there was supposed to be).
But if the amalgamation can affect accuracy, then this does mess up Forsyth’s story – the Jackal was striving for high accuracy in his shot, and couldn’t stand any “queering of the pitch”. Maybe he would’ve been better off with the glycerine-filled bullets. assuming glycerine even worked. (I can’t see it being as good as mercury – mercury is DENSE, and glycerine isn’t)
By the way, the bullets were used within days – Zinneman puts clocks and calendars in practically every shot, so you’re acutely aware of time passing. How long does it take before mercury-filled bullets aren’t useful?
Well, I did come Googling to give Cal his due, and I discovered one important fact: there are some really creepy people talking about some really scary shit on the internet!
But besides that, they pointed out that there can be absolutley nothing besides the mercury inside the bullet, or else the cavity will allow the mercury to solidify. And even if you did manage to hollow out the bullet and fill it with mercury to the most precise tollerances, the ballistic qualitites of the bullet would be compromised when it expanded in the barrel, making it more likely than not to emerge from the muzzle as spray.
And if the point of it all was to hit the vcitim in the head with an easily concealable 22 round, why not just use a high-velocity rifle bullet instead of a little pistol round filled with mercury? You could hide either one up your butt just as easily.