Black List Glocks

[SNAFU]

Re: Black List Glocks

In THE SHIELD - Claudette carries an old six shooter, meanwhile Dutch carries a shiny 9MM semi-auto. The reason? Characters.

Claudette is much older, about to retire, very set in her "old school" ways; whereas Dutch is part of a new wave of detectives, well educated with a modern view and always happy to try new tactics.

The show's maker's knowing their weapons was spot on. Each character carried a different weapon - or the same to show likeness in some uni's, each one a defining part of their personality.

Busted. LETHAL WEAPON rip off...

[Todd Karate]

Re: Black List Glocks

Yeah, I'd have to agree with Bill.

In THE SHIELD - Claudette carries an old six shooter, meanwhile Dutch carries a shiny 9MM semi-auto. The reason? Characters.

Claudette is much older, about to retire, very set in her "old school" ways; whereas Dutch is part of a new wave of detectives, well educated with a modern view and always happy to try new tactics.

The show's maker's knowing their weapons was spot on. Each character carried a different weapon - or the same to show likeness in some uni's, each one a defining part of their personality.

I actually think you're helping make the "it doesn't matter" argument, in a roundabout way. The generals of "old school revolver vs. new school semi-auto" aside, do you know what brand of semi-auto Dutch carried? Or Lem? Or anyone else? No. Because the specifics didn't matter.

But you know what kind of gun Harry Callahan carried, because the specifics mattered.

[Geoff Alexander]

Re: Black List Glocks

I have to side with the execs. They weren't ignoring your research and saying you were wrong. They were very clear - it sounded wrong.

Screenplays aren't documentaries. If something is technically right but it bumps the audience, it's wrong. I don't think you can write for the 1% of the audience who knows that Custer was briefly a general.

To me, it would be like telling George Lucas that ships can't make noise in space. He says it doesn't matter, for the experience you need the sounds. You insist he's wrong, he does it anyway, and then you complain that he's ruined Star Wars.

I agree. People often try to fill with detail what they lack in creativity. IMO, it's all about the story and its impact on the reader/audience. The defense that "this is the way it really is" just doesn't hold up as a justification for a story decision. Now, obviously, you need to have a sense of authenticity, but wether or not something is true or accurate is less important than that it seem so. To paraphrase Graham Greene when someone expressed admiration for the incredible amount of research that he clearly did in his novels, "I don't really do much research at all. I simply find one or two things that are true and put them at the beginning. After that, everyone assumes that you are maintaining the same level of truth."

[Geoff Alexander]

Re: Black List Glocks

SB I get what you mean, but some add details to create a buyable world, so I think there needs to be a balance for sure. Too many details can overwhelm, especially an exec, but putting research into a project and discerning which details are relevant to the world is what being a good writer is about. You're creating on a page and expecting people to picture it, so no specificity creates a lukewarm world. What's compelling about that?

The Coen Bros. may have had accuracy issues with True Grit, but you wouldn't know it because they really illustrated the Western lexicon, and I really appreciated that level of detail, as a movie-goer. That had to come as a result of research - via the book no doubt, creativity, detail and balance between them all.

Let me add that the reason I'm posing this argument is that in the past, I took the brevity of detail thing SO LITERALLY, that my work became skeletal. I even did it with my last spec and my agent was confused by this. My agents wanted things both rich and built out. So creating the world to me is paramount, however you get there and however accurate you need to be or not be to convince the reader.

We are saying the same thing, I think, i.e., it's a balance. But, many people take the path of too much specificity delivered in a fashion that does nothing for the story.

[gravitas]

Re: Black List Glocks

I'm guilty of that too, haha. As I'm sure I've said before, you have to know how much English to put on the cue ball.

[wcmartell]

Re: Black List Glocks

Audience members who know about guns:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110118/...chool_shooting

- Bill

[one seven spectrum]

Re: Black List Glocks

I actually think you're helping make the "it doesn't matter" argument, in a roundabout way. The generals of "old school revolver vs. new school semi-auto" aside, do you know what brand of semi-auto Dutch carried? Or Lem? Or anyone else? No. Because the specifics didn't matter.

But you know what kind of gun Harry Callahan carried, because the specifics mattered.

Lem hardly ever carried a piece as that wasn't his style, though he usually rocked in with a pump action shotgun when they took down the heavy busts.

But do we need to know exactly what brand Dutch used? No, we just need to know enough to get the idea of the difference in characters as I mentioned above. And yes, as pointed out by someone else, this was also done much earlier in flicks like LETHAL WEAPON etc.

Callahan was given that weapon in the DIRTY HARRY films because when you see it, it means business. Appearances of weapons with their characters are one thing, but mentioning a safety and Glock in the same sentence, it's not needed.

If you're going to mention a specific brand, as opposed to a general type, such as 9MM or .45 - then know your sh*t or don't bother because if you come off wrong then it takes people out of the story.

I don't even own a gun, never fired a pistol. But I know most makes and models thanks to American cinema

[SNAFU]

Re: Black List Glocks

That scene when the .50 Barrett "jams" in HURT LOCKER---total BS. Yes, semi-autos can jam, but not because of silly stuff like a bit of blood on the magazine.

Trust me, I know...and I'll bet a ton of other folks questioned that scene, also.

[sbbn]

Re: Black List Glocks

I'm reminded of what Sorkin said recently. I'm sure it's been mentioned in the Social Network thread:

"I don’t want my fidelity to be to the truth; I want it to be to storytelling. What is the big deal about accuracy purely for accuracy’s sake, and can we not have the true be the enemy of the good?"

I've heard that before and I think it's a great quote (and Sorkin is a great writer). But as I interpret it, it isn't saying just make sh*t up and who give a damn if it's accurate or not; the issue is "accuracy purely for accuracy's sake."

Sorkin either does his research or the guy is just omniscient and doesn't need to do research because he already knows everything. No other alternative. I'm still impressed with how accurate A Few Good Men was in terms of judicial proceedings. 100% accurate? Maybe not but it sure as hell wasn't thrown together slapstick. One small (of many) examples: I'm willing to bet Sorkin didn't just happen to know what an "Article 39(a) Session" is. Whether he looked it up or he asked someone, it's research just the same.