This came up in another thread but rather than hijack that one, I’ll start a new thread. I’m wondering what things you’ve seen in a movie that you know isn’t right, but the way they did it made for a better story.
For example, something that most superhero movies get wrong is the strength of materials. The Hulk may be strong enough to grab a tank by the gun barrel and toss it, that’s supposed to be his power. But the gun barrel isn’t strong enough to support the weight of the tank. If he tried to throw a tank by the gun, he’d actually end up pulling the gun out of the turret.
But you know what? Most of the time that sort of error makes for a better action sequence. It’s not often that it’s so egregious that it actually pulls me out of the story. It’s a superhero movie after all, some suspension of disbelief is necessary.
A funny collection of King Kong essays called King Kong is Back! was published just before the Peter Jackson movie came out. One of the essays commented on all the reasons it was better to keep the story in 1933 than to bring it out into the present. One thing the essay also touched on was the square-cube law. If there really was an ape the size of King Kong, it would be incredibly slow.
Them! and Tarantula ignore the square cube law, but are still very good films. But with the square cube law, there’s no movie.
In {b]The Hudsucker Proxy** a major plot point is that, when you fall from the top of the Husucker Building, it takes 30 seconds to hit the ground. However, the actual time, given the established height of the building, would have been about half that. Anyone who thinks that’s a problem with the film is an idiot.
And you’re right about superhero films: none of them has any basis in reality. Even Batman – there was an article pointing out that his mask wouldn’t hide his identity for more than a few days (ironically, the author, Tom Rainbow, died a superhero’s death when he was killed by a subway train while rescuing someone who fell on the tracks).
In almost any police action movie, the car chase involves both idiot drivers ignoring the sirens so they almost get hit, and nothing happening to the cops who wreck tons of cars. I don’t think the cops spending the next half hour of the movie filling out paperwork would advance the plot.
The only exception I recall - the Dragnet remake where they keep winding up with worse cars, until they get to a Yugo - “the cutting edge of Serbo-Croatian technology.”
Man, I would kill for a collection of Tom Rainbow articles. Why no one’s ever bundled them up and published them in book form is beyond me. His whole thing on sentient life still fills me with laughter. (So if girls can be sentient, that means. . .)
Frankly, I think this is more promising than the facial-recognition angle. Facial-recogniton software really only works on shows like Alias and (heh) Mission: Impossible. Following the money, on the other hand, would be the way to go. Batman obviously has access to some serious money. Either he’s rich, or he has a wealthy sponsor. What’s more, a lot of his gear (especially parts for the Batmobile) are specialty items that are probably only available from a small number of sources.
I’d love to see them, too. My guess is that 1. there aren’t enough of the to fill a book, and 2. no one at this point knows who he was, alas.
One nice example of the question in the OP was the movie Hans Christian Andersen. The movie forthrightly says, in effect, “This has nothing to do with the facts of Anderson’s life, but it’s a good story, so there.”
But this is the 21st Century and we now have print on demand books! IIRC, he’s got a widow, she could put them together and publish 'em that way. (Wish I could remember what his real name was, might be able to track down his widow and suggest it to her.)
But you only know that because you already know what George Clooney looks like. Bruce Wayne stays out of the papers fairly well, and Batman is quite adept at avoiding having his photo taken. Beyond that, in Gotham there are probably so many theories about who Batman really is that even if someone did put the pieces together and figure out he was Bruce Wayne, their theory would get lost in the static.
Not for anyone diligently looking to make the link. Bruce Wayne often has his picture taken (squiring around beautiful women, giving money to charity). As for Batman, it would only take one picture to start connecting the dots. In addition, computer analysis could figure out what was behind the mask well enough to come up with a sketch.
And, of course, there are plenty of other ways to trace Batman and his toys. They have to be manufactured somewhere.
