Full Metal Jacket is a realistic war movie? The beginning was entertaining, and I stress entertaining, but after that is mostly nonsense, but entertaining nonetheless. Which is the point so many have tried to convey. It's a movie, meant to entertain an audience and make money in the process. I don't think many veterans would consider FMJ a realistic war movie. Now drop down and give me forty maggot breath, before I rip your head off and... Never mind. I would never do that.
At the end of the day it's just a movie and as such is full of Hollywood bologna, so I just watch it with my kids and enjoy the scenery....
N&W Class J posted:At the end of the day it's just a movie and as such is full of Hollywood bologna, so I just watch it with my kids and enjoy the scenery....
Chris, you are totally right. As to my post on page 2, I noticed those things, but acctually I don't find the movie a problem at all. It's a train movie. At least trains made to the movie theater and they were the main characters in Unstoppable. But also don't forget the train movie for TV, Final Run from 1999. That was ok for the time it came out. But again, a lot of people will probably chew that up. But in my opinion, it's just a movie. Enjoy a movie with a train. And as a matter of fact, this evening I watched Superman Movie from 78 that has the Amtrak and New Haven. And from listen, they did use the correct sound of a Hancock Air Whistle. But other then that, enjoy movies with trains in them. One movie comes to mind that had a train scene that was cool was Canadian Pacific in Heaven Is For Real.
MarkLX200 posted:RickO posted:I tell you one thing, the idea of a giant gorilla climbing the Empire State building seems entirely plausible.... until he falls in love with a human female...... what a joke!!
I've seen a few good lookin females out in public with big ugly hairy apes.
Good point! I stand corrected!
I find myself agreeing with a number of posts here, even some contrasting opinions. While I enjoyed the movie and was ready to be "entertained", the premise and foundation of the movie was that of a runaway train and the "drama" that goes with it. In portraying this as a serious dramatic film, I feel (my opinion) that the director needs to maintain accuracy and realism. It takes so much away when this "trust" is broken for effect. I do enjoy Hollywood effects, when they are inline with the premise. A good example would be the star trek spoof Galaxy Quest, not a great movie, enjoyable, but you know what to expect. I wanted to really love "Unstoppable", but I'm onboard with those that compare it to that other recent great train disappointment, Extreme trains.
I listened to the 8888 incident on my scanner. I started to pick up police and fire calls as the train approached Findlay. Followed it all the way till they got it stopped near Kenton. It was almost like listening to an old radio show. I'll never forget hearing "Shots fired, Shots fired" when they tried to hit the shut-off. It was fun watching the movie and comparing it to what I heard on the scanner. "Artistic license" was definitely applied here.
On a side note: There was a CSX wreck at Marysville, OH today on the same line that the 8888 incident happened. I wonder if they will make a movie about this one.
Tom
It's important to remember that much of what you see and hear on TV, movies, and radio is incorrect to some extent. As someone interested in politics, I find it amazing to see coverage of say the recent Iowa caucuses. Even some TV reporters don't seem to understand that a caucus isn't an election - no voting booths, no election judges, etc. You have to take everything with a grain of salt....
As much as I enjoyed "Unstoppable", I have to admit to chuckling through it. Not like the anger I felt watching Agent Carter last week when the villain was listening to big band music on a Bakelite radio in 1920... Or seeing a 50 star flag in a WWII movie... Or watching a plane in Midway take off as a torpedo plane, turn into a fighter and crash as a dive-bomber yet to be built.
Jon 
DOC posted:I wish MTH would of offered the engines. I know I would of picked them up.
So do I see a "who has modeled trains after movies" thread in the near future?
It's been a while since I posted on this topic but the post above is back this morning.... Anyway It doesn't matter where the conductor rides . I'm sure there are times when switching (lifting setting off) especially around a yard when the conductor or yard foreman is no way near the engine and a switch needs lining ahead of the engine.
A good section crew could have derailed the train in no time at all. End result.... a big wreck .
OK, off thread. One my grandfather told me (and I'm 76):
Q. Why is a spanked child like a locomotive?
A. Because they both have a tender behind.
Gregg posted:I'm sure there are times when switching (lifting setting off) especially around a yard when the conductor or yard foreman is no way near the engine and a switch needs lining ahead of the engine.
Unless you're in a yard where ALL of the switches are lined remotely by the yard/trainmaster in the tower
Kent, that has morphed into a license plate holder that says "Model Railroaders have a Tender Behind". I've seen more than one of these at various and sundry train meets.
This thread is Unstoppable!
FX has Unstoppable on and I decided to watch the first 20 minutes. That butthead that "lost" 777 couldn't he just get on the locomotive behind 777 and walk to the front cab? I know it's a movie, but there are so many plot holes.
Larry
It was entertaining!!! Fun watch.
It is an entertaining movie and a movie about trains and it shows more trains than most any other train movies. I enjoyed it and did not bother with any short comings on petty things included or not. The movie was loosely based on a real event but more believable than most action movies. Lighten up fellows.
Charlie
@Choo Choo Charlie posted:Lighten up fellows.
Charlie
No thank you. Just because someone in Hollywood decides to "make it more entertaining" does not mean it actually is more entertaining.
I am sorry if I stepped on some toes. I just viewed the movie 3 days ago on TV and never heard of it before. I would never have seen it if football season had started. I thought it compared to most movies with trains and was mostly well done and showed much more railroad activities than most others, opening it to more errors and criticism. Most movies take great liberities with actual life and facts. I never worked in the railroad industy but managed a small, in plant, railroad for a few years and the RR was very small part of a much larger industry. I am not a train expert by any measure.
Charlie
@Choo Choo Charlie posted:I am sorry if I stepped on some toes. I just viewed the movie 3 days ago on TV and never heard of it before. I would never have seen it if football season had started. I thought it compared to most movies with trains and was mostly well done and showed much more railroad activities than most others, opening it to more errors and criticism. Most movies take great liberities with actual life and facts. I never worked in the railroad industy but managed a small, in plant, railroad for a few years and the RR was very small part of a much larger industry. I am not a train expert by any measure.
Charlie
Don't let them get to you. The movie from a strictly fictional aspect is entertaining. While based on true events of course the movie folk are going to add their take. I can see where it annoys a railroad person, but for us laymen it was entertaining. I'm sure the real Luke Skywalker had issues with the way George Lucas portrayed him and the events from a Long, Long time ago. For those who watch movies based on their field of employment and expertise, sometimes you have to turn off that part of the brain and enjoy yourself.
I like fantasy, but at the same time I don't like insults to what little intelligence or common sense I might have. I still cannot understand the scene when Denzel's friend uses his engine to slow the monster down, the railroad throws the switch and while the friend's engine steers into the siding the monster keeps going straight?! Is that Hollywood or can that happen...possibly by momentum causing the engine to jump over the points? Seems ridiculous.
@Paul Kallus posted:I like fantasy, but at the same time I don't like insults to what little intelligence or common sense I might have. I still cannot understand the scene when Denzel's friend uses his engine to slow the monster down, the railroad throws the switch and while the friend's engine steers into the siding the monster keeps going straight?! Is that Hollywood
Yes.
or can that happen..
Nope.
.possibly by momentum causing the engine to jump over the points?
Nope again.
Seems ridiculous.
Correct, i.e REALLY ridiculous.
You guys must be real fun to watch a movie with.
I trust (or hope) that the portrayal of the two geniuses who lost control of the big engines do not represent the avg. hostler or railroad worker 
What ever happened to kill switches (recall the engineer had to keep his foot on switch less the engine lost power)?
This article from a paper in the area the real event occurred discusses many of the "reality vs movie" issues:
@Paul Kallus posted:I trust (or hope) that the portrayal of the two geniuses who lost control of the big engines do not represent the avg. hostler or railroad worker
What ever happened to kill switches (recall the engineer had to keep his foot on switch less the engine lost power)?
If you are referring to the alerter, if the independent is applied or cut out it will no longer function as so - also, not all equipment is required to have one
