[qq=ShlupMoo]Anyway, having read that, it is quite true, though...if things were made to be realistic I don't think movies would be all that entertaining...they would be like plays or something.[/qq]
[qq=The site]There's an old axiom in fiction writing which says it's okay to ask a reader to believe the impossible but not the improbable. For example, it's okay to say that a maniac has activated an antimatter bomb in the wall safe, but it's not okay to say that someone miraculously guessed the right combination on the first try.[/qq]
I think that quote is about right. Read the review for the movie A.I. Artificial Intelligence. I like reading fantasy novels. People shoot giant fireballs out of their hands. I don't say "OH NOES TAHTS NOIT POSSIBAL IN FIZIKS" when I read it, because it's a story about a different sort of world. There's a difference between that, and making mistakes out of ignorance. When Arnold Schwarzenegger dives face-first through a window and has nary a scratch to show for it, either the writer of the movie is too stupid to realize that in real life it'd kill you, or else the writer is relying upon the audience to be too stupid to realize it. Suspension of disbelief is a necessary part of enjoying a movie, and when the world doesn't behave logically or consistently, it's distracting at the very least. I'm not SUPPOSED to be thinking "Well, this movie apparently takes place in an alternate dimension where physics doesn't apply; how stupid". I'm supposed to be paying attention to the plot.
Also I hate plays.
