It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Hollywood Doesn't Understand Tech(46 posts)(46 posts)
(46 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
This is my favourite topic
Posted May 06, 2011
We geeks might get wound up about the portrayal of technology in these shows, but really that aspect is no different from the numerous other plot devices and contrivances. Are major city streets ever as empty as they are on CSI when a car chase scene is required? Are standard law enforcers really able to shoot people in the head with one shot at 300 metres using a pistol? Do people really just get more angry when they are shot rather than, say, bleed to death?

I have to say that the only tech fallacy that actually annoys me is the "closeup shot of fingers typing o keyboard". Watching someone typing 75 words per minute in order to input a 7-letter password using only the middle nine keyboard letters is pretty infuriating. :)
Posted May 06, 2011
avatar
Lobsang1979: snip
And it's a piss poor story teller who keeps going back to them. And it's a sign that a series has either run its course, or, since it's been that way since day one of any of the modern police procedurals (reality TV, dramas, etc.), a sign that they're after easy cash and don't give a damn about the audience. In which case, why the audience gives a damn about the show is mind boggling.

If there was only a single side to writing a script, to making a show, to make money from advertisers and investors, then you could say they were doing a good job, since they made it on the air. But since by means of getting that money they have to appeal to an audience, they've fucked up their jobs by not even trying. And people are failing their damn intelligence tests by watching, no matter if the shit they put up is nonsense tech, nonsense plot, nonsense characters.
Posted May 06, 2011
avatar
Lobsang1979: snip
avatar
nondeplumage: And it's a piss poor story teller who keeps going back to them. And it's a sign that a series has either run its course, or, since it's been that way since day one of any of the modern police procedurals (reality TV, dramas, etc.), a sign that they're after easy cash and don't give a damn about the audience. In which case, why the audience gives a damn about the show is mind boggling.

If there was only a single side to writing a script, to making a show, to make money from advertisers and investors, then you could say they were doing a good job, since they made it on the air. But since by means of getting that money they have to appeal to an audience, they've fucked up their jobs by not even trying. And people are failing their damn intelligence tests by watching, no matter if the shit they put up is nonsense tech, nonsense plot, nonsense characters.
Calling people who watch not for realism but for entertainment dumb? Nice.
Posted May 06, 2011
Did I say a damn thing about realism?
Posted May 06, 2011
avatar
nondeplumage: Did I say a damn thing about realism?
avatar
Lobsang1979: snip
avatar
nondeplumage: And it's a piss poor story teller who keeps going back to them. And it's a sign that a series has either run its course, or, since it's been that way since day one of any of the modern police procedurals (reality TV, dramas, etc.), a sign that they're after easy cash and don't give a damn about the audience. In which case, why the audience gives a damn about the show is mind boggling.

If there was only a single side to writing a script, to making a show, to make money from advertisers and investors, then you could say they were doing a good job, since they made it on the air. But since by means of getting that money they have to appeal to an audience, they've fucked up their jobs by not even trying. And people are failing their damn intelligence tests by watching, no matter if the shit they put up is nonsense tech, nonsense plot, nonsense characters.
Sounds like it to me.......
Posted May 06, 2011
These really aren't things I would watch normally but I think the point the guy made is valid that it would take a 5 min Google for the writer to know just how stupid he is.
Posted May 06, 2011
NCIS did used to try back in the first few series. At least, they used real names for handhelds and the like, but somewhere along the line the lawyers must have gotten edgy as they suddenly started making up names for well known handhelds.

And that is probably most of the problem here. Not the writers, but the suits and lawyers too afraid of being sued if they put out accurate information (IP holder might sue them if they're implying their stuff is used to commit crimes, etc.)
Posted May 06, 2011
avatar
bansama: NCIS did used to try back in the first few series. At least, they used real names for handhelds and the like, but somewhere along the line the lawyers must have gotten edgy as they suddenly started making up names for well known handhelds.

And that is probably most of the problem here. Not the writers, but the suits and lawyers too afraid of being sued if they put out accurate information (IP holder might sue them if they're implying their stuff is used to commit crimes, etc.)
Myfaces and Pearpods and Mapple, OH MY!
Posted May 06, 2011
avatar
Lobsang1979: snip
avatar
nondeplumage: And it's a piss poor story teller who keeps going back to them. And it's a sign that a series has either run its course, or, since it's been that way since day one of any of the modern police procedurals (reality TV, dramas, etc.), a sign that they're after easy cash and don't give a damn about the audience. In which case, why the audience gives a damn about the show is mind boggling.

If there was only a single side to writing a script, to making a show, to make money from advertisers and investors, then you could say they were doing a good job, since they made it on the air. But since by means of getting that money they have to appeal to an audience, they've fucked up their jobs by not even trying. And people are failing their damn intelligence tests by watching, no matter if the shit they put up is nonsense tech, nonsense plot, nonsense characters.
I would hazard that very few people are cerebral about everything they do, all the time. I mean I love to be intellectually challenged whether it's by playing chess, doing crosswords, having philosophical discussions or making something with my hands. That does not mean, however, that every form of entertainment or stimulation I seek must operate at a constantly enlightened level. I mean, I'm also a gamer after all. ;)

Two shows that I watch at the moment (of many) are NCIS and The Mentalist. Both of these shows are crime dramas that operate at a pure entertainment level, although not every episode is equally satisfying of course. The Mentalist even works by convincing the average viewer that they are as smart as the main character, despite the fact that you only ever see what the makers intend you to and so are carefully guided towards certain conclusions. Do I feel dirty after I've watched it because of this? No, I just enjoy the characterisations and storytelling if they have appealed to me.

On the other hand, there are many shows that try to take the high road and convey themselves as being more intelligent than, in fact, they are. The most recent Battlestar Galactica is an example of this for me, a show that in my opinion was so far up its own arse that it could gargle its eyeballs. I know many people enjoyed the show for various reasons, but after watching the full series I just felt annoyed more than anything else.
Posted May 06, 2011
avatar
Lobsang1979: The most recent Battlestar Galactica is an example of this for me, a show that in my opinion was so far up its own arse that it could gargle its eyeballs.
Best and most accurate review of Battlestar I have ever read.
Posted May 06, 2011
This is why I watch Law and Order :P. Especially the early series, as they were a different era from the CSI crap.
Posted May 06, 2011
avatar
Lobsang1979: The most recent Battlestar Galactica is an example of this for me, a show that in my opinion was so far up its own arse that it could gargle its eyeballs.
avatar
Delixe: Best and most accurate review of Battlestar I have ever read.
Hear ye! My thoughts exactly on both counts. And I usually get fed up when any holyer than thou crap/religion messes up a perfectly nice show or book for that matter.
Posted May 06, 2011
avatar
sethsez: Hollywood gets tech just fine, the vast majority of the industry runs on some of the best tech that exists and there's no way anybody can be a director or editor without having something resembling tech-oriented interests.

The issue is that things are altered to either make the storytelling faster, more interesting, or easier for the audience. The easiest example for this is hacking... of course hacking doesn't work like it does in movies, but the way hacking does work would be boring as hell on camera. Now granted, Hackers goes about trying to solve this in the dumbest way possible, but it's not because nobody involved "got" computers, it's because they tried to solve a fundamental issue and cocked it up along the way.
My thoughts exactly.
Posted May 06, 2011
As an expert in the field, Dexter has it all wrong.
Posted May 06, 2011
avatar
lukipela: They were putting C4 in the computers.
avatar
nondeplumage: That is exactly 4,721.927 times more retarded than magic combustion.
Actually you could safely stick a brick of C4 into your PC. You do realize that it actually requires a detonator to set off Composition C explosives? Random electrical activity from a PC wouldn't do it.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Hollywood Doesn't Understand Tech(46 posts)(46 posts)
(46 posts)