| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Starship Troopers: Difference between revisions
StanTheMan (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
I pointed that out to my dad and he responded, "Well, if you know where to hit the monsters, you generally don't need them." Lawl. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 09:50, 17 February 2015 (EST) | I pointed that out to my dad and he responded, "Well, if you know where to hit the monsters, you generally don't need them." Lawl. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 09:50, 17 February 2015 (EST) | ||
: Actually some do seem to aim (somewhat), not by a full shoulder-up and sight-down but rather by a half-assed version of that where they do a sort of virtual/instinctual aiming using the carry handle as a guide. Admittedly though, it would be considerably more difficult to be accurate that way; you could definitely forget about any good hit probability at any decent range. Though, given how the troopers fight in this film, that's not much a problem - The ranges they generally fire at don't really require much more accuracy anyway. Spartan's old man pretty much said it with hitting the target as being accurate enough in this instance. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 13:01, 17 February 2015 (EST) | : Actually some do seem to aim (somewhat), not by a full shoulder-up and sight-down but rather by a half-assed version of that where they do a sort of virtual/instinctual aiming using the carry handle as a guide. Admittedly though, it would be considerably more difficult to be accurate that way; you could definitely forget about any good hit probability at any decent range. Though, given how the troopers fight in this film, that's not much a problem - The ranges they generally fire at don't really require much more accuracy anyway. Spartan's old man pretty much said it with hitting the target as being accurate enough in this instance. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 13:01, 17 February 2015 (EST) | ||
It's not uncommon for ranged weapons in sci-fi to have rudimentary or non-existent iron sights in order to look "high-tech." The famous [[Blade_Runner#LAPD_2019_blaster|PKD Blaster from Blade Runner]] has just an extremely small front sight, for one thing. Detractors of [[Star Trek]] have been mocking the lack of sights on "Type 2 Phasers" for years as well. Of course, back in the pre-gunpowder days there were no such things as iron sights, but people learned to shoot things like slings and bows accurately anyway (it certainly didn't hurt that many users had years of practice under their belts, which is more than what the "meat for the grinder" in this film got). --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] ([[User talk:Mazryonh|talk]]) 18:17, 17 February 2015 (EST) | |||
Revision as of 23:17, 17 February 2015
I have one of the Morita Rifles from the movie but it's all beat up. I still have my battle armor from the movie shoot (you know, the guy that was standing 355th from the guy on the left! ;) I'll try to fix up the Morita rifle and photograph it. sigh, yet another thing to do. MPM2008
- No stress. There are actually lots of pics of the Moritas from the movie floating around on the 'Net, but obviously, we'd rather have one of yours than something taken from another site. Whenever you get around to it. -MT2008
- Are you by any chance visible in any of these shots MPM? Obviously I wouldn't ask you to point yourself out if you are, but I'd still find it cool to know if you were. - Gunmaster45
- Does your Morita rifle still work?
- Uh, the Moritas are shells. Any live guns like the Ruger AC556 and short barreled Ithaca 37 would be removed and locked up in the vault with all the other cinema weapons. My morita can still fit a Ruger Mini 14 but there were tons of internal structural damage and putting the rifle back in and trying to fire it would just result in a rifle bouncing around a sci fi shell, which is really unsafe. I have some Morita pulls, i.e. stunt Moritas which were molded with the Rifle and and short Ithaca 37 mounted so that it looks complete. I will see what I can do but the Morita still needs a bunch of repairs. remember it's over 13 years old.MoviePropMaster2008 22:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Does your Morita rifle still work?
- Dude, that would be badass! If I had one I would bring it to the range and turn some heads-S&Wshooter 18:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
in the book the mobile infantry used power armor that made tanks look cheap. they never said the full armament in the book. the weapons mention were "pewee nukes", a bomb launcher on the back, "hand flamers", some sort of energy weapon called a "knife beam" also having jumping ability (including jet and rocket boost assistance), and provided the wearer with improved senses (infrared vision and night vision, radar, and amplified hearing), a completely self-contained personal environment, sophisticated communications equipment, and tactical map displays. Their powered armor made the Mobile Infantry a hybrid between an infantry unit and an armored one. so they can move fast and kick ass. every mobile infantry used power armor making them a formidable fighting force
- The CGI series was more accurate with the book somewhat, and the 3rd movie, straight to DVD of course brought the power armor. I want to know what the guns are built from in that movie Excalibur01 18:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- I believe they were M1 Thompsons in a really big plastic shell. I'll try to screencap that at some point. - Gunmaster45
also the bugs in the book had ships, city and energy weapons
Live fire exercise section
I'm not sure who wrote this, but they seem to have missed the point a little; it's supposed to be ridiculously unsafe, fitting in with the movie's nature as a satire; it's the classic 'badass bootcamp' sequence taken to the level of outright absurdity. Vangelis 08:57, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
- I wrote this, and no Vangelis, it is not excuseable. It is dumb, plain and simple. It makes the audience groan, and not in a good way. Verhoeven did a lot that was intentionally over the top. This was just stupid. They were trying to make the camp look busy and bustling with people, but even during filming, people were grousing about how dumb the entire live fire layout was. Try not to make excuses for it. MoviePropMaster2008 22:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Uwe Boll made a hilariously bad movie about Vietnam and this is still the stupidest war movie I have ever seen. Atypicaloracle (talk) 06:37, 19 February 2013 (EST)
- It is easily the worst movie TCM has ever aired for their annual "28 Days of Oscar" festival. (Nominated for best visual effects.) --Funkychinaman (talk) 10:40, 19 February 2013 (EST)
- The combat sequences are this film's weak point, frankly. As a satire of fascism, Starship Troopers does a very good job.--Euromutt (talk) 03:54, 17 February 2015 (EST)
- Uwe Boll made a hilariously bad movie about Vietnam and this is still the stupidest war movie I have ever seen. Atypicaloracle (talk) 06:37, 19 February 2013 (EST)
I could do more damage with an airsoft rifle!
As much as I actually do enjoy this movie, the Mobile Infantry couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag... Spartan198 11:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
the MI in the book were better Rex095
SouthPaw Morita shot
I believe that shot is reversed, if you watch the original trailer they have the same shot but the not reversed I'm assuming
http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/2909/mortia.png
Since you obviously don't pay attention to the captions written under the screenshots, the creator of this page even pointed it out that it's a reverse shot Excalibur01 02:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
"An impressive lineup of Morita Rifles. Either the shot is reversed or all the actors are aiming their rifles "Southpaw" or Left handed". It does not state that it is just implies that it is.
The future is here
Has the Morita inspired this? Foofbun 20:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC) http://www.military.com/news/article/army-sending-new-airburst-gun-to-101st.html
No, that gun was part of the OICW project. The OICW project had been around since before the ST movie came out.-Ranger01 21:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
And the X-25 is just an airburst grenade launcher. It's not an assault rifle. It used to be part of the OICW project and it used to be BIGGER because the airburst grenade launcher has an assault rifle underneath it. I mean, if you've done more research on bullpup rifles, you can see many other weapons that are very successful, like the AUG, FAMAS or the Tavor. Excalibur01 22:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for that! Here in Leftieland we don't get much news on weapons so it's new to us.Foofbun
- You could do a google search for Bullpup weapons and it'll give you a ton of sites that'll talk about it Excalibur01 01:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Sights? Who needs sights?
I'm re-watching this film on Netflix, almost twenty years after I saw it the first time, and while I think I noticed the first time that nobody in the film actually sights their weapons, only now, thanks to the magic of IMFDB.org, do I notice that that is to a large extent because almost none of the weapons even have sights to begin with. The exception being "Sugar" Watkins' "sniper" rifle, which has a bloody huge sight which he doesn't use either (though Raszcak does when he borrows the weapon). --Euromutt (talk) 04:14, 17 February 2015 (EST)
I pointed that out to my dad and he responded, "Well, if you know where to hit the monsters, you generally don't need them." Lawl. Spartan198 (talk) 09:50, 17 February 2015 (EST)
- Actually some do seem to aim (somewhat), not by a full shoulder-up and sight-down but rather by a half-assed version of that where they do a sort of virtual/instinctual aiming using the carry handle as a guide. Admittedly though, it would be considerably more difficult to be accurate that way; you could definitely forget about any good hit probability at any decent range. Though, given how the troopers fight in this film, that's not much a problem - The ranges they generally fire at don't really require much more accuracy anyway. Spartan's old man pretty much said it with hitting the target as being accurate enough in this instance. StanTheMan (talk) 13:01, 17 February 2015 (EST)
It's not uncommon for ranged weapons in sci-fi to have rudimentary or non-existent iron sights in order to look "high-tech." The famous PKD Blaster from Blade Runner has just an extremely small front sight, for one thing. Detractors of Star Trek have been mocking the lack of sights on "Type 2 Phasers" for years as well. Of course, back in the pre-gunpowder days there were no such things as iron sights, but people learned to shoot things like slings and bows accurately anyway (it certainly didn't hurt that many users had years of practice under their belts, which is more than what the "meat for the grinder" in this film got). --Mazryonh (talk) 18:17, 17 February 2015 (EST)