Maybe it's nitpicking but I liked the fact that it tried to be as realistic as possible so why did they make amazons real, she could've just been a soldier.
I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute of it.
[deleted]
I could get behind the idea of a movie about the "realistic" story behind mythical heroes. But if you do that you cant have Heracles run around with Superhuman strenght. You cant do BOTH.
shareWhat superhuman strength?
Apparently when humans are pumped full of adrenaline, they can lift ridiculously heavy objects. As in it's been documented in real-life where humans have lifted cars, so it's not too unbelievable he could tip a horse or rip up some chains.
The big one is the statue scene and while I'll happily agree that's exaggerated...that's kinda the point of movies.
If in real-life, a regular person with average muscles can lift a car while running on adrenaline, I'll happily suspend my disbelief enough to go with someone like Hercules can knock over a big statue and still be just a really strong man!
___
http://twitter.com/aps87
He only had to shift a couple of hu dred pounds for the statue to get inbalanced
shareHe flipped a horse over with one hand and ripped bolted chains out of the floor
hes way stronger than any human.
Did you even read my post?
"suspend my disbelief"
"exaggerated"
"kind of the point of movies"
I agree it's not scientifically accurate, but it's a swords'n'sandals fantasy, not a scientifically accurate real-life drama.
___
http://twitter.com/aps87
I agree it's not scientifically accurate, but it's a swords'n'sandals fantasy, not a scientifically accurate real-life drama.
Hahahahahahahhahaha...
Are you for real?
Even if we go past the statue, weighing few TONS!!! is adrenaline is what you call when Herc the Rock Johnson punches the demon warrior with his fist and the guy flies for 10 meters, or when he kicks a couple hundred kg cart and sends it flying as well, picking some guy along the way if I recall. OR when he picks up a fully grown, and well fed man with one hand, and throws him like he's a doll...OR when he nicks the tree during the ending phase of his swing, and tree explodes like it was shot with 50mm gun! Or when he breaks the huge chains (there is actually a very nice video Johnson posted which shows him, a tower of a man, struggling with real chains...He also admitted blacking out after each of those attempts)...and pretty much every punch or throw he made in this movie...
So, people are usually talking about that kind of superhuman strength, nothing more...And no, it isn't adrenaline.
And no, exaggeration isn't what movies are about...And if they wanted that path, a mythical path, they should have done that, instead of being lost over what they actually want to do....
While humans running on adrenaline can indeed lift cars its important to remmeber that they do that at the expense of their muscles, ripping them apart and would die if not given proper medical attention from internal bleeding. medical attention that did not exist back then.
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
"The big one is the statue scene and while I'll happily agree that's exaggerated...that's kinda the point of movies."
i.e. You need to suspend your disbelief.
Some of the best action movies have such high levels of exaggeration, yet are just accepted because that exaggeration makes a good movie: One beat-cop fending of and killing over 10 trained criminals in Die Hard, similar for the Rambo films (sure, he's more trained in killing, but have you seen the amount of guy he kills while remaining not-dead himself?), etc - the list goes on. Sure the strain on their body may not be superhuman, but the astouding luck they have compared to the human skill-level they're meant to have is off the chart - well into unbelievable territory, if it wasn't a movie. But they are movies, as is this.
I'll happily accept a bit of exaggeration in a clearly fantastic setting (yes, he's meant to be probably human, but that doesn't mean the genre isn't still fantasy, and based on a comicbook), when some much grittier movies set in the real-world get away with just as much.
___
http://twitter.com/aps87
sure, but why open it with going into "real people do it too" then. Also there is only 1 person kileld in first Rambo movie. In fact first one was pretty damn realistic.
I will definatelly accept that movies are not reality, especially movies about people who were supposed to be half-gods. merely wanted to say that the adrenaline effect really cant explain it.
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
I like how you pick the one movie of a series that proves your point when you ignore every other expample that totally goes against it, despite him still technically being a regular human.
Also explain Die Hard then? Explain Rambo 2-4 If this film needs 'a reason', what are those films' 'reasons' they didn't die within the first 20mins of each?
If those films don't need a reason and it's just because it looked cool and they're meant to be slightly luckier/more skillful than the average real-lifer who might find themselves in similar situations.
If your argument is "Well, that can just be lucky, this is actual superhuman nonsense", how do you explain the scene where McClane is tumbling down the air vent and manages to somehow miraculously grip onto the tiny window opening with the very tips of his fingers as if he's Spider-Man? That is utterly un-human (his body weight would easily mean his grip wouldn't be enough and he'd carry on falling), yet accepted because it's a cool sequence in an action movie.
Again: Sometimes the "It looks cool" factor outweighs real human limits, and that's a good thing because it makes movies more exciting than real-life. In real-life, Hercules would've been stampeded to death and John McClane would've fell down the air vent chute to his death, and Rambo would've still probably died in First Blood (he might've killed one guy, but he still managed to escape many more who were gunning for him - that was my main point: not that he kills so many, but avoided getting killed by many more) but that wouldn't have made very satisfying endings.
___
http://twitter.com/aps87
I like to think that the original movies carry more weight than a cash in sequels after it, but that is a personal bias, i agree.
Now i havent seen Die Hard in a while, but i dont remmeber anything superhuman about it in the first movie. once again its the sequels that got crazy (though admittedly they are quite a spectacle. the car chase scene in the last one is great).
Rambo was a decodated Vietnam veteran who spent most of the last decade of his life fighting guerilla warfare in a forest versus lazy small town police force that did not expect anything more than a random passerby. I think its fair to say that Rambo was quite the superior in guerilla warfare tactics.
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
I described it pretty well:
He was falling down an airvent and managed to grip (while falling) onto the ledge of a little 'window' with the very edge of his fingertips. Sheer physics would've meant he wouldn't have been able to stop that plummet with just the strength of his fingertips - at best he'd have broken his fingertips with the weight/velocity of his own falling body, at worst he'd have ripped them clean off on the sharp-looking metal on the edge of the ledge.
It's hard to find a shot from the actual movie, but here is a shot from another movie with a similar set-up - http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XQKEc_c4-sY/TztlOnWqgYI/AAAAAAAADUQ/XeGYijg_ l_k/s1600/the+black+rainbow.png. Except there was no foot ledge and it wasn't his whole hands managing to get a grip of the window, just the very ends of his sweaty fingertips. You see? It should've been impossible. Possible in a movie where you need to suspend your disbelief? Sure, but impossible if you tried to recreate it IRL.
And Rambo was good, I'm not denying that, but in real-life - as you want to compare these films to and want them to adhere to the realism of, apparently - he'd have been killed relatively quickly, and definitely not survived four films worth of the escapades he got up to.
Anyway, point is that even 'realistic' films stretch the imagination, so a film about a Roman/Greek demigod (even presented as a human), based off a comic-book? I'm willing to suspend my disbelief and accept he is still much stronger than a regular person, and that includes the things he can accomplish while adrenaline pumps through his body. I know we'll just keep arguing over finer points, so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
___
http://twitter.com/aps87
no, it was YOU that wanted to compare these films to real life. Here is what you said:
Apparently when humans are pumped full of adrenaline, they can lift ridiculously heavy objects. As in it's been documented in real-life where humans have lifted cars, so it's not too unbelievable he could tip a horse or rip up some chains.
And I myself was arguing against the post: "I could get behind the idea of a movie about the "realistic" story behind mythical heroes. But if you do that you cant have Heracles run around with Superhuman strenght. You cant do BOTH."
My point was "Sure you can anyway, but if he needs to justify it in his head to accept an enjoyable film, here's an example of something at least similar in humans" - I wasn't saying it was actually realistic, nor complain; I was trying to help another guy be able to resolve conflict in his own head, not say it was actually truly believable.
My whole point has never been that this film was realistic - my point was that no film is realistic, and I'm personally fine with that. But if you need something to be realistic to be able to suspend your disbelief, there's always small grains of reality that can be applied to most situations in action films - just stretched beyond those realistic limits.
I thought you were saying Rambo was wholly realistic and believable - sorry if I misunderstood.
I wasn't saying this film was realistic or even trying to be. My point was that even compared to the car thing, this is hyper-unrealistic, but based on a real phenonemon (even if it does rip out muscles, my point was that humans have been known to lift objects seemingly far too heavy, so I'm fine seeing a demi-god - regardless if he's human or not - topple a statue in a fantasy film); yes, I totally agree it's unrealistic that a person could topple a statue, but I never meant to imply it was.
My point was that I'm okay with stretching my disbelief. My point was "Don't complain about every unrealistic thing in films, otherwise you'll be here all day and never appreciate anything - or you're a hypocrite who excuses non-realism in films you do like while using it as an insult against films you don't like for other reasons." Case in point - Don't get me wrong, Armageddon was a horrible movie for the acting, cheesiness and so on (I mean, I still love it personally, but I won't deny it's definitely a cheesy, badly-acted film), but I'd never use the unrealisticness of blowing up an asteroid as a reason for disliking it, because I can accept suspension of disbelief as a part of movie-watching.
tl;dr: Sorry if we got our wires crossed - I'm in no way a troll and don't like to complain at all. My point was trying to quell someone else's complaints by giving them something to resolve their confusion if they needed it, not try to say "This film is realistic" or say realism is something needed in this or any film - I was arguing quite the opposite.
___
http://twitter.com/aps87
you are so full of poo dude
shareThe amazons were real. At the very least they were based on real women. Scythian people for example have been unearthed with weapons and about 1/3 of them were female. They were horsemen/women and leaned toward a shortbow that was particularly wicked for its day. Many believe they were the amazons of antiquity.
shareJust goes ta shows ya pns envy is really nothing new
shareAmazons were not real, now, were there woman who fought? Yes, because times were dangerous, everyone, literaly everyone knew how to fight with bow and some basics in combat were necessary. But the tribe of exclusivly woman fighters? No.
shareThe Amazons did have some supernatural elements like the girdle and the fact that there complete fiction
I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute of it.
They just presented her as an Amazon in order to inspire awe. As was made clear from the campfire conversation they had that she was actually Scythian royalty. Scythian women were actually known for participating in warfare as excellent archers (some even burned away one of their breasts to better aim the bow) and they are what the Amazon "myth" is actually based on.
Scythians = Amazons if you will.
Exactly it was made pretty clear in the movies that they talked things up. They called Hercules a Demi God called the armour indestructible and the female fighter an Amazon. I don't get why that is so hard to comprehend.
Its something you'll get used to a mental mind *beep* can be nice!
Atalanta wasn't an amazon she was a huntress.
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/a/atalanta.html
The only problem that I had with this amazon was her belly-free tank top armor with sculpted breasts.
share