Factual errors: The Guyver bends down the barrel of a revolver held by one of the thugs. In order to do this, the thug would have to be strong enough to bend it himself..
Does anybody else think that this should be explained rather than just said? I mean, it just sounds stupid without an explanation. Granted, I understand the reasoning, but it doesn't sound like it makes sense.
[deleted]
I'm confused. What do you mean I'm incorrect?
Just in case, to clarify, I just copied and pasted the Factual error from the Goofs page for the Guyver. I saw that one and thought it sounded rather retarded. After thinking about it, I could understand their point, but it just sounded like such a ridiculous thing to call a blooper. I didn't want to sound stupid and say that it was completely wrong. It doesn't seem to make sense, but I can see how it could.
And, yes, I explained it to myself the exact same way you just explained it to me.
So, basically, I'm saying, either it should be removed as a goof, or it should be explained HOW it's a goof, as it just doesn't seem to really belong there.
It isn't a goof. It is a factual inaccuracy or factual goof, ie It cannot possibly be done in real life so therefore is classed as a factual goof.
shareBut don't you think it should be explained better?
shareI don't. I understood what it meant when I read it. It doesn't need a complete technical explanation that does the reader's thinking for him.
As to it being a goof: if instead the Guyver pinched the barrel shut or took the gun before bending it, those alternatives would not have required the gang member's to exert half the force.
It can't be a factual goof as you put it, if that was the case every super hero film released would be full of factual goofs, guyver is more or less a super hero, superman has done the exact same thing in t.v series and films.
It's a film its not real
Yes, they are full of them. This is why there's a 'factual error' category.
shareI'm confused....
I didn't say it was a factual error. I was talking about the fact that imdb has it listed under Goofs as a factual error. And that bothered me. I just copy and pasted what it said.
Thug holds a gun to Guyver, and Guyver bends the barrel of the gun straight down. No, I don't think that was a goof, considering that the Guyver is strong enough to pull that stunt off. Maybe the thug couldn't do it, but to the Guyver that gun barrel might as well have been made of thin plastic, and it was held right to his face.
There are millions of Games People Play,
But only one played by all.
It's called Life.
do you guys actually watch manga, this is the case alot of the times. I mean do you really think someone can find an alien armour and become 'one' with it. I mean its about as likely as bending a gun. ITS A MOVIE!!! and a sci-fi movie at that.Make believe hence science fiction.
shareIt's not saying that th Guyver wouldn't be strong enough to do that, it's saying that the thug wouldn't be strong enough to hold on while he did it.
Think of it this way. The guyver is bending the gun at one end. The thug is holding the other end. The thug has to be just as strong as the Guyver to bend the gun. Otherwise the gun would be pulled out of his hand.
No big deal, though. It's a cheesy B movie, so who cares?
Congrats for being the first guy who gets it!
Now we just need a thread explaining why it's impossible for bullets to knock back bodies as seen in typical B rated action movies.
The reason they do the knockback effect is because surprising amount of people actually think its what happens in real life.
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
I get that.
I think everyone has basically misunderstood the point of my initial thread.
I understand the physics of the situation. Though, there are ways, technically, that the Guyver could've done it himself without the guy not having to have to have the proportionate strength (such as, what I think someone mentioned, if the Guyver was holding the handle with one finger and twisting the barrel with his other fingers), but that's neither here nor there.
And I wasn't saying they should've explained it in the movie.
I wasn't saying that it isn't a factual error.
I'm saying that the way it is listed in the goofs section seems completely random.
If they just say that this can't happen, it should be explained why. Perhaps give an explanation of physics and such. But also put why it could be possible.
I would just prefer if when someone looks at the goofs section, they understand what it says, rather than them thinking "Huh?"
That's all.
Only the Guyver and Robocop have this ability
sharehow do you know that the Guyver didn't heat the barrel of the gun in a fraction of a second so that it bent like butter.
If it were the Godfather or or The Good Shepard I would be concerned but The Guyver is such a cheesoid little fun movie how can a little bending of the laws of physics cheepen it even more.
Another of the extenuating circumstances that makes it possible :)
shareOkay listen, the guyver just walks up grabs it and within seconds it bends, which gives him no time to heat it. And the thing is the way he's crushing the gunmakes it an error. There are more ways to break a pencil with one hand, however those would have you holding the pencil in your hand with the point of where you want it to break in the centre of the pressure points excerting on the pencil. Explanation enough? No i'm not geek just plain physics. In the case of the movie with the force that the guyver excerts and the thug still grasping the gun trying to fire would mean the pressure upon the hand of the thug would be so great it would then rip off at least the trigger finger or break his wrist.
shareI don't care if it's a science fiction movie, the thug is a normal human. Albeit that Guyver is the frikkin Guyver, it's simple logic. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, that's Newtons Third Law. Therefore it makes complete sense that the thug would have had to apply equal and opposite force for this to happen. And if anyone is willing to argue with Newton, the man who created Calculus, god save your soul. When i read that, it wasn't a mind shattering realization. I hope everyone thinks about this and sees that it's perfectly fine as a goof.
shareOH MY GOD!
I am not saying it's not a goof! I'm just saying that it shouldn't just BE THERE, it should have an explanation attached.
For instance, the explanation that you just gave.
Now, if it said this, or something like it:
Factual errors: The Guyver bends down the barrel of a revolver held by one of the thugs. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. That's Newtons Third Law. Therefore, the thug would have had to apply equal and opposite force for this to happen. In order to do this, the thug would have to be strong enough to bend the gun himself, which he clearly isn't.
I would have NO problem with it.
hey i just wanted to let you know that from reading your initial post i completely understood what you were saying and i agree with you all the way.
Bossman
Haha, oh man. You were hit with a classic case of people replying to your thread without actually thinking about it. I got what you meant when you first posted and I was amazed in how many replies you got before someone read your post and actually thought about why you'd have that question. Instead you were rushed by sci-fi fan boy morons that were too high and mighty or to offended to give a valid answer.
The answers in this thread should be a B movie because they were so terrible that they were good. Hahahaha.
lol ya, I read the first post too and thought
ya he's right, that shouldn't be in the factual errors
then I read all these people yelling and screaming
ITS A MOVIE GET OVER IT! GEEZ GET OVER IT ITS JUST A MOVIE
and I was very confused as to these replies.
I was like, wtf are these idoits talking about? He was saying THIS is NOT an error and shouldn't be there
then he's got all these people replying like hes dissing the movie because of this factual error. The replies he got you would think he said
"Guyver bent a gun? yah right, this movie is stupid and crap because he does things you cannot do in real life"
gotta love idoits who read 1 post, get confused and post something just so they can DEFEND THERE FAVORITE MOVIE!
LOL the whole time he was DEFENDING the guyver movie and everyone was treating him like he was dissing it.