(I am waiting for the resident gun nut to make an appearance and bring up the 2nd amendment - hehehe).

I'm not going to go political and 2A here, but the gun handling on most every TV show or movie is horrible. The way people repeatedly pump the shotgun, they'd be out of ammo before they first pull the trigger. Every pistol when handled makes some sort of cocking noise, without actually racking the slide. Why do so many cops carry around a gun without a round in the chamber, so that they have to rack the slide before going into action? "Ha, I saw the safety was on, so I could...." But that Glock doesn't have a safety. And not all black handguns are Glocks. And getting shot with a handgun, one time, does not knock you across the room and instantly kill you. And on and on and on....

Cop shows in general - they sure have access to a lot of DNA databases, including some that don't exist, like the military. What real life cop office space is so bright, so roomy, so modern as what you see in half the shows? Barney Miller probably came closest to reality.

I've read that quite a few cops commented on Barney Miller being prety typical. Two scenarios I just love (sarcasm).

  1. Cop fires off six rapid rounds at someone who is safely behind cover. Repeats, then laments "I'm out of bullets".
  2. Cop (or crook) steps from behind cover into the open, stands with feet apart and fires, then immediately gets shot because he is completely exposed.

And why is it that nobody ever observes the ten foot rule? It seems the person with the gun will always stand close enough so that the other person is able to grab the gun.

And how many bullets do those hand guns hold anyway? I've seen people shoot over 30 shots out of a 6-shooter gun without reloading.

And in True Lies, in one scene a gun bounces down a flight of outside stairs and shoots many of the bad buys.

Compare that with older movies, I watch 1967 film Head of the Night last night and I don't recall even seeing a gun.

not quite sure, but I think you can get 20 round magazines for some Glocks. Not 30, but same order of magnitude.
It's one reason the US Army went with them to replace the M1911, larger magazine capacity for the same weight category (and no doubt gear commonality with DHS...).

Most idiotic movie for that infinite ammo syndrome must be the Matrix.
And of course in Hot Shots Part Deux they do a rather nice joke on the theme :)

Well, in the Matrix, "reality" was actually a computer simulation so infinite ammo was not an issue, although it should have been suspicious to those in the simulation.

jwenting - there are some 30 round magazines for Glocks and other black pistols. Not really handy for maneurving with, stick way out of your holster. Many black pistols will normally hold 15-17 rounds in their normal capacity magazines.

US military went to 9mm Berrettas to replace the .38 revolvers and .45 1911s. Commonality was a consideration, with NATO, as DHS didn't even exist back then (1980 something, IIRC). Interesting to note that the Marines recently let a contract to buy a bunch of new 1911s!

Other TV/Movie stuff - how about the guy driving a car that spends 20 seconds looking directly at the passenger during a conversation, while driving in city traffic at full tilt?

" Same thing with the virus. Going from 1 case to 3 is not so bad. Going from 1000 to 3000 is serious."

You do the same thing, pulling numbers out of context. 3000 out of 10.000 or 3000 out of 100 million?

"For star trek I always wonder why holodec safety protocols can be turned off like a flick of a switch? I mean really why on earth should they be able to be turned-off at all?"

That's explained. The holodeck is used for different purposes, military training and civilian entertainment. For the military scenarios it's needed to turn them off.
Ditto with some medical training.

"Medical drama's are no better than the cop shows, resustitation (CPR, defibrulators) is not usually successful and even if it is the patient often ends up with brain damage or other serious conditions."

I just assume they don't show the majority of cases they have to deal with :)

vmanes, the Marines allow their Force Recon to select their own weapons. Interestingly, most of them by far select the 1911 over the Glock (I think the Rangers and SEALs have a similar policy, not sure).

I agree that Sherlock (BBC) is much better than Elementary but it is just as bad as other forensic shows when it come to science - although Sherlock's lab is closer to the real level of clutter than other shows. But my major pet peeve with CSI and their ilk is when people don't turn on the lights! Seriously the perp isn't there anymore you don't need to be all 'sneaky' and it is way easier to find a stray hair or lift fingerprints if you have the lights on. Even in their lab most of the time the ceiling lights are turned off while they're working.

I can't stand, no, I loathe reality shows like Honey Boo Boo, Real House Wives of any sort, 16 and pregnant, and all the likes. American Idol is another type, Big Brother, and other shows of that nature too (except The Voice, I like that). I cannot stand the pretentiousness of those types of shows and I would be so annoyed if I actually knew people like any of the peeps on any of those shows. Mayhap it's because I'm getting old or something but I just don't understand how that shit has become so popular?!? A month or so ago I subjected myself to about 15 minutes of Real Vancouver House Wives and I was beside myself thinking that there were actually people like that in Canada. Ick.

Real Vancouver House Wives and I was beside myself thinking that there were actually people like that in Canada.

Don't know that 'show' but if it's like the stuff that's printed in the headlines here as superimportant information about the "stars" of shows here with similar names I have a similar reaction...
Though I comfort myself with the idea that as long as they're all locked up in a Big Brother House they can do little harm to society ;)
Of course even more disturbing is that there are enough people interested in watching that dreck for hours a day to make it profitable from the advertising income alone to create and air the shows.

I hate the concept of "reality" shows because they do not, in any way, reflect reality. These shows are cast(ed) based on lists of character types. Let's see, we need a villain, a bitch, a lazy black guy and an entitled black woman (note the pandering to stereotypes that help to reinforce racism), a nerd and a hunk. We also need a blond with fake boobs, and don't forget the gay guy. And if he's queer as well as gay then so much the better. These shows glorify and promote bad behaviour. They promote the idea that there is no difference between fame and infamy and that bad behaviour gets rewarded. Snookie got her chops busted by being obnoxious to a drunk guy in a bar. That's what happens in the "real" world.

Of course even more disturbing is that there are enough people interested in watching that dreck for hours a day to make it profitable from the advertising income alone to create and air the shows.

Agreed, but one of the reasons they have become so common is that they are pretty cheap to manufacture: no writers and no actors to pay means even a small audience keeps them in profit.

Although I will admit, I like the Amazing Race (and its Canadian version) because it is just as much about the places and tasks (and the product placement) as about the people.

it is just as much about the places and tasks (and the product placement) as about the people.

I have to agee. I enjoy Amazing Race. I was actually quite pleasantly surprised at our Canadian version. I was prepared to find it a pale imitation of the US version, especially after the wretched Canadian Idol. Even though I am from Winnipeg I felt that Tim & Tim from Winnipeg did not deserve the win. They won more through luck than skill. I also got tired of every discussion coming back to Parkinson's. My wife and I were rooting for Jet & Dave. All in all they were better competitors and much more entertaining.

Have you ever noticed on Castle that when Beckett is standing or walking she is always in high-heeled (almost stiletto) boots (standard issue for all female cops) but in all the scenes where she is chasing someone she is wearing flat soled shoes?

Well, that must be part of the training at the academy... learning to switch your high-heel shoes for flat soles in a split second. I mean, that's a necessary skill for a female cop, right?

Let's see, we need a villain, a bitch, a lazy black guy and an entitled black woman (note the pandering to stereotypes that help to reinforce racism), a nerd and a hunk. We also need a blond with fake boobs, and don't forget the gay guy.

I think you're being too harsh on the people selecting the cast.
Yes, the need a black guy and a black woman, a homosexual, a couple of Asians, some latinos, etc. etc.
But that's not for stereotyping but to prevent being sued for not being "inclusive of minorities".
And the average watcher (which is the only type of person you'd find interested in taking part in such shows) will guarantee you end up with those stereotypical people you describe.

And thus it becomes a self reinforcing spiral, people who don't match the stereotype become even less likely to like the shows enough to want to take part, as they can ever less identify with the people they see in "reality shows" and thus drop from the radar.

And the average watcher (which is the only type of person you'd find interested in taking part in such shows)

Depends on the show. I get the feeling the most horrible ones (like jerry springer or fear factor) actually just attract the most desperate people who really need the money/free stuff that comes with it whereas the audience is meant to pity/laugh at/feel superior than the contestants.

I've never seen Jerry Springer (or even had the opportunity to watch) but I imagine it existed solely so that people whose lives were complete crap could watch and say "well, at least my lot is better than that." I also believe that most of the people who got on the show were just making shit up to get their 15 minutes of fame (and a paycheque).

I imagine it existed solely so that people whose lives were complete crap could watch and say "well, at least my lot is better than that."

Yup.. that's pretty much what it is. I call it "Trainwreck TV". I think you watch it for the same reason you slow down while passing a car accident on the road. Good or bad, there is definitely a strong curiosity in people for watching that.

I also believe that most of the people who got on the show were just making shit up to get their 15 minutes of fame (and a paycheque).

There were probably some people making up the stories, but from what I have gathered, Jerry Springer was like most reality TV today, that is, the people are "real" (real people, real stories (at least, some part of it)), but what they do on the show is extremely forced, prompted, exaggerated, staged and edited for higher dramatic value. That's the "deal" with most reality TV, people sign waivers saying that they won't sue the show for making them look like fools, and then they follow directions (from the show's crew) to cause more drama / fighting. And once you agree to look like a fool, you might as well make the most $ of it. Pretty much all reality TV shows are done like that, such as Jersey Shore, Kardashians, The Hills, The Bachelor(ette), 16 and pregnant, Real Housewives, Big Brother, ... and so on. I would think that Survivor is not as bad in that sense (at least, I don't get that impression), but, of course, there is heavy casting involved and it's not exactly "reality" TV since they are in an "extreme" situation. It's pretty much the only reality TV show that I ever watch(ed) with interest.

only reason I slow down near accidents (if there's no traffic jam forcing me) is so I don't get hit by people running around without looking at traffic (including any emergency crews...).

As to survivor shows, those are the most heavily staged of all.
If you look even a bit, you see the "survivors" appearing every "morning" of their "ordeal" freshly washed and shaven, in clean clothes without a hole or gash in them, and no doubt after a hearty breakfast.
IOW they're just play acting, and are removed to a comfortable hotel or lodge after shooting the daily episode in half an hour or so.

The best of the "Suvivor" series was the Australian one where one of the camps got flooded which clearly was completely unplanned/unanticipated. But otherwise they are just camping without a tent/sleeping bag.

The only real survivor show was "Survivorman" and most of his adventures only a few days before the crew start looking for him.

If you look even a bit, you see the "survivors" appearing every "morning" of their "ordeal" freshly washed and shaven, in clean clothes without a hole or gash in them, and no doubt after a hearty breakfast.

Yep if you look closely EVERY reality show is fake.

It's pretty much the only reality TV show that I ever watch(ed) with interest.

It's my guilty pleasure. I try to overlook the cheating. Even in season one, Richard Hatch said that he caught the production crew sneaking food to certain players. He agreed to keep quiet as long as the production company agreed to pay the taxes if Richard won (which they apparently did not). I also wonder at all the different changes of clothes I see over 39 days when the players are only supposed to have what they are wearing, plus one luxury item.

Remember when the Professor made a fake hidden immunity idol one season? He didn't make it from stuff he found on the beach.

Alright, maybe Survivor has a lot of fakery too.. but I still find it fun to watch, for the thrills and strategy in it.

You guys, life is all about (and like) Jersey Shore. Bob bless Snooky.

I think in TV and film that there is a term for just believing things or ignoring them for the sake of action and entertainment.

I'd still like to add to this list however.

A number of to super agents are are chasing a bad guy, the action and shots along with the intense music have you on the edge of your seat, wow this is great this is, you think, as the persuit takes them accross rooftops jumpimg impossible gaps over 100ft drops on a building they only had to climb two flights of stairs to get to the top of.

Several cops and agents are in communication with the van parked over the road which witnessed the whole one mile chase.

Then suddenly, the chase is back on the street as the assailant makes around a corner onto the main street, but OMG! a gentleman pushing a hotdog stand gets in the way of the hot in pusuit cop, and he calls it in, the chase is over, the guy got away behind an ice cream truck or whatever.

Booooooooooo!

Even in season one, Richard Hatch said that he caught the production crew sneaking food to certain players.

Sure, because otherwise many would end up seriously ill from nutrient deficiencies or just malnourishment in general. I bet they have a bathroom with toothbrushes & toothpaste and well as some kind of toilet too so they don't end up with cavities or get dysentry. Just as if their cuts/bug bites show signs of infection they get antiseptic creams and antibiotics. Not to mention the lack of any issues when the women are menstrating (as they all should at some point in the 30 day series).

An incidental character is just shot, while the hero is put into some kind of elaborate will-blow-up-at-some-tme-in-the-future position to kill them. Of course they escape in the nick of time.

Just bad writing = the villian or criminal is the person who was introduced once in the beginning of the show and you never see them again, but they had some hidden or unknown reason to commit the crime/murder. It's too boring to watch when you know that they have to be the criminal, and know there is no way to figure out who did it because you won't know the details until right before the end. Just lazy writing.