Bullets 'n' Babes

How am I talking nonsense?

Unless you don't believe me when I said I've never spotted it before, as I'd wager most haven't either. Just because you guys have, so what. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to exactly "give up" when I've never even seen it up until the other day.

Besides I was specifically responding to Romero's comment that I've never seen T2, just because I didn't spot the stunt double.

Like it remotely fucking matters anyway. We all know they're there, we all know CGI isn't real, move on. It's a movie!

How would you know its a movie, you shut your eyes when its on obviously

From what I understand, Brad watches movies like he watches TV.
He's watching, but not "really" watching.
He watches carefully enough to understand what's going on, but that's about it.

There's nothing wrong with that, but it makes you wonder about what he's doing on Bullets. Most of us are film fans (as in "fanatic"). He just sounds like a casual viewer to me.

EDIT:
Regarding the stunt double "thing", I'm sure most people notice it (there's nothing else to look at in that frame) but dismiss it almost instantly.
"Oh, a stunt double! Oh well... it's Hollywood, anyway. Moving on".

Gee thanks Tom. Just because I don't spot the odd fucking stunt men I'm suddenly not a film fan, and not part of your elite little group of so called "better members of society".

You say there is nothing wrong with "not spotting stuntmen" then persist in insulting me. Nice one!

Fuck off! Is all I can say to that.

Yes I am a film fan thank you very much but it doesn't mean I pause every fucking frame in the hope I spot a stunt double or some other cock up. Like I said before I'd prefer just to watch the film. I really don't give a monkeys if you can see a stunt double.

You're also deliberately choosing to ignore the fact I've been very vocal on a number of occasions about the over use of CGI, because a "casual fucking viewer" would care about that wouldn't they?

What non-film fan would spend time to write up his/her thoughts on a film afterwards? Think before you post next time.

tom2681 wrote:but it makes you wonder about what he's doing on Bullets.

For the constant abuse, why else?

tom2681 wrote:Regarding the stunt double "thing", I'm sure most people notice it (there's nothing else to look at in that frame) but dismiss it almost instantly.
"Oh, a stunt double! Oh well... it's Hollywood, anyway. Moving on".

Come on, you honestly reckon that? Sure many people have noticed it. I could well believe that but most people? Most people go to the cinema to switch off for 2Hrs, they couldn't care less about anything else.

Most people I'd wager don't even know what a frame is, let alone nothing else being inside it .

A film fan wouldn't be watching 1:33:1 OAR films in zoom mode.

EvaUnit02 wrote:A film fan wouldn't be watching 1:33:1 OAR films in zoom mode.

Change the record. Yes I prefer to watch 4:3 material so it fits a 16:9 frame, get over it and move on. You've brought that up so many fucking times.

I thought it stood for Film Fanny?

No one is saying, Brad, that the stuntmen should spoil the movie for you. If they don't that's great. But to not notice them in even the most apparent circumstances - like the examples outlined - does suggest you don't pay attention or are unobservant.

Markgway wrote:I thought it stood for Film Fanny?

Huh?

Markgway wrote:But to not notice them in even the most apparent circumstances - like the examples outlined - does suggest you don't pay attention or are unobservant.

Obviously I can in those captures but as for the movie: I bet you all to find 10 people (not off the Internet) who've seen T2 and ask them if they've seen the stuntman in question.

I bet over half and likely most will not have. Why is that fact so hard to grasp? Most people simply don't spot stuntmen and all cockups. It's not an unusual thing or a hard concept to understand.

Markgway wrote:does suggest you don't pay attention or are unobservant.

It's not a matter of paying attention, isn't it only one screen for a matter of seconds?

I'd understand if it was minutes but it is not but yes correct as I keep saying I am unobservant when it comes to stuntmen. Tom claims that's cool but then insults me for not noticing.

Brad wrote:Yes I prefer to watch 4:3 material so it fits a 16:9 frame

There's nothing more to add, then.
I solemnly promise never to read anything you post ever again (unless it's in a PM).

Brad wrote:Fuck off! Is all I can say to that.

With pleasure, kind sir.

Is anyone able to add the USA BD, German HD-DVD or another?

bradavon wrote:

EvaUnit02 wrote:A film fan wouldn't be watching 1:33:1 OAR films in zoom mode.

Change the record. Yes I prefer to watch 4:3 material so it fits a 16:9 frame, get over it and move on. You've brought that up so many fucking times.

Becuase it just goes to prove what an utter tool you can be, and yet you waste so much time here posting stupid comments

We can safely say that comment applies to all of us at times . Most of the comments in this thread are good examples of that. Being so pig ignorant to actually think everyone spots stuntmen, except myself.

Does anyone else fancy having a dig? Go on, you know you want to . I was posting at Romero yet three other members so far have felt qualified to comment. Come on everyone else, pile in, again.

Those are / were quite obvious, but Cameron movies are full of them and other dodgy effects / shots. It's because he aims too high and is the first go to that far for every movie he does, so some parts suffers because he doesn't have (unlike Avatar) unlimited time and money.
In True Lies, it's great to see Arnie's double fighting the motorbikers in the snow and shooting them for like 5mn until the real Arnold finally shows up. Guess why ? The shooting was over, and Arnie was doing another film, so they had to shoots parts of the chase without him.

Is that the one where the stuntman had an Arnie mask?

Apart from the snow chase, there's also the bit where he rides the horse. When it jumps thru the water you can clearly see the stuntman is back. I don't have a problem with them using a stuntman for that shot, but bloody hell, make it less obvious.

Sudden Death is worse, because Van Damme is doubled for fight scenes, which he never had been before. I don't know the reason, maybe he was injured? But in numerous shots/scenes you can clearly see it's a double. Eg. When he fights the Penguin in the kitchen.

Van Damme VS The Penguin(!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9sQW8eD8QM

Brad can you spot the double here??

Yeah but all of them pale in comparison to the entire film that is Fist of Legend, pretty much every shot is a bad double.

I think its more that Brad trys to get the best looking version of a film, yet cannot see doubles. If you can see beter picture I would espect anyone like that to see all doubles. Bad picture can pull me out of a film as much as a double.

Lets show Brad Plan 9 and see if he can spot the Lugosi double!

Markgway wrote:Van Damme VS The Penguin(!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9sQW8eD8QM

Brad can you spot the double here??

What moment does it occur? That scene is 3 minutes long and it's just too painful to watch Van Damme for that long .

romerojpg wrote:Yeah but all of them pale in comparison to the entire film that is Fist of Legend, pretty much every shot is a bad double.

I bet you can guess how many stunt doubles I spotted in that film? .

Ivan Drago wrote:Lets show Brad Plan 9 and see if he can spot the Lugosi double!

Please do.

p.s - The word is Let's .

The worse stunt doubling I've seen in a Hollywood film is in Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man. In the end fight, the closeups show Bela Lugosi as the Monster doing a reasonable job at fighting the wolf man and acting fierce. In numerous long shots, at least 2 different stuntmen are seen playing the Monster very stiffly and slowly, their arms and fingers pointed out ludicrously.

See here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URKcpHeObbU

Spotting the stunt doubles in HK movies is fun because you can usually recognise the stunt double as some future famous actor!

Ivan Drago wrote:Spotting the stunt doubles in HK movies is fun because you can usually recognise the stunt double as some future famous actor!

Yeah that is funny. Like Jackie Chan in Enter the Dragon.

Jackie isn't doubling anyone in Enter The Dragon

Ivan Drago wrote:Lets show Brad Plan 9 and see if he can spot the Lugosi double!

Bradavon wrote:What moment does it occur? That scene is 3 minutes long and it's just too painful to watch Van Damme for that long .

Don't slag off Van Damme. You're in enough bother already.

The clip is ONLY 3 mins and he's doubled THROUGHOUT. Just watch the bloody thing!

Ivan Drago wrote:See here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URKcpHeObbU

Lol. That was ace. I love the bit when Frankie pushes over the machine and Wolfie goes flying. Genius. 8)

The doubling in the other films we've mentioned is worse than that. And that was made in the early 40s!

Isn't there some Steven Segal film where its not him for much of the shots and ADR?

Clementine, isn't it?