The Mandela Effect

[Kaveh]

Originally Posted by MrSparkle001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

He only won because of Trump.

Just like Trump only won because of Hillary.

Elections now are about who you DON'T want to win. We have no real control over who gets the nomination though, and there's the problem.

The primary system really doesn’t work that well

[hobart]

Originally Posted by DMN [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

it might explain why Joke Biden cant go a sentence without rewriting history or spouting some other innane bit of nonsense. which brings us to the important question, were his voters from another reality too? mystery solved?

Only an inflamed asshole could turn a movie thread into a Tucker Carlson segment.

Seek help for your SJDS.

[Jimjam]

How does it compare to Sonic 2 (the most recent movie I watched).

Are there plenty of Sanic and Ugandan Knuckles references? Do they spoof death and drowning sprites?

[starkind]

Nothing compares to sonic 2 jimjam [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[unsunghero]

Saw Top Gun yesterday, first movie in a long time. Was ok, it was over-hyped by my family IMO

I thought it was pretty formulaic. I was predicting everything ahead of time and was right about all of it. Plot was pretty basic. The last action parts were pretty seat gripping intense and well-done. I’ve heard the navy actually donates their planes and carriers to use for those movies because they cause a spree of young people joining the navy, so they are almost like recruitment promotional movies for them. I was joking with the girl I was with that it’s kind of a weird message to send to possible recruits though: “Join the Navy, your admiral is going to be a dickhead, so just disobey their orders and do what you think is right”. That is definitely NOT how the military wants their soldiers to operate

In regards to not sidelining this topic, I do like sci-fo so I may try to check out this Mandela movie, but I don’t know how to see it. I used to pirate stream them with putlocker but those sites have been shut down pretty well. I have Amazon prime and Netflix so if it’s on either of those I could catch it that way

[Danth]

Originally Posted by unsunghero [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I’ve heard the navy actually donates their planes and carriers to use for those movies

They were doing that all the way back in the 40's and 50's. It was more common back then than it is now because hollywood movies tended to be more pro-military back then. For what should be obvious reasons the U.S. military generally won't support films it sees as anti-military.

If the admiral is a jerk and the pilots get treated like dirt it's basically accurate to life. Pilots are expensive to train and always limited in number but for some reason the armed forces continue treating them like they're disposable. It fuels their exodus to civilian jobs which generally already pay better for less injury risk. The Navy may have known this is an issue and wants to get it some publicity in a deniable manner (ie, nobody wants to put his own job on the line). The original "Top Gun" film was used in part to try to raise public awareness (and hence, get people yelling at Congress) of the faults with the F-14. The scene where the RIO dies is basically true-to-life; the plane suffers a compressor stall and engine flame-out, the pilot instinctively but incorrectly tries to fight it with the stick instead of with opposite pedal, the plane rapidly enters an unrecoverable flat spin and they're left with no option but punch out. A number of real F-14 crews were injured or killed in similar fashion, and for a number of years Congress didn't want to fund any remedies like engine replacement.

There are also a couple of brief but very neat shots of a rolling scissors towards the end of the first film. As with the above, it is not directly explained for people who don't know what they're seeing. If the new film has similar tidbits, it might be worth a watch.

Danth

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

They were doing that all the way back in the 40's and 50's. It was more common back then than it is now because hollywood movies tended to be more pro-military back then. For what should be obvious reasons the U.S. military generally won't support films it sees as anti-military.

If the admiral is a jerk and the pilots get treated like dirt it's basically accurate to life. Pilots are expensive to train and always limited in number but for some reason the armed forces continue treating them like they're disposable. It fuels their exodus to civilian jobs which generally already pay better for less injury risk. The Navy may have known this is an issue and wants to get it some publicity in a deniable manner (ie, nobody wants to put his own job on the line). The original "Top Gun" film was used in part to try to raise public awareness (and hence, get people yelling at Congress) of the faults with the F-14. The scene where the RIO dies is basically true-to-life; the plane suffers a compressor stall and engine flame-out, the pilot instinctively but incorrectly tries to fight it with the stick instead of with opposite pedal, the plane rapidly enters an unrecoverable flat spin and they're left with no option but punch out. A number of real F-14 crews were injured or killed in similar fashion, and for a number of years Congress didn't want to fund any remedies like engine replacement.

Danth

Oh interesting

The admiral is going over the mission objectives with Maverick (Tom Cruise) and finishes and Maverick adds “and get out alive, right?” Because the admiral didn’t include that

He just kind of sits back and says “the pilots know the risks”. It felt like a bit of a callous exaggeration still

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by unsunghero [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Oh interesting

The admiral is going over the mission objectives with Maverick (Tom Cruise) and finishes and Maverick adds “and get out alive, right?” Because the admiral didn’t include that

He just kind of sits back and says “the pilots know the risks”. It felt like a bit of a callous exaggeration still

Spoiler me the enemy with better tech please.

[unsunghero]

Originally Posted by Reiwa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Spoiler me the enemy with better tech please.

They do a great job of never saying. Pilots are all wearing full high tech helmets, no language is spoken, no ethnicity shown. Target is enriching uranium somewhere cold so maybe they want you to assume Russia but they never put any other country on blast…unless they did and I missed it

[Jibartik]

Top gun is sci fi if you think about it as propaganda they wanted to hold off on releasing until the war started in real life.