I actually like the "tweets" during the show. I do think they take up a bit much space and would be better in a ticker or smaller bar on the bottom of the screen. And not also be coupled with the promo ads in the other corner of the screen which is just dumb because, as said, it covered up the faces at certain times which is just terrible presentation code to go by. I just got done watching it, not much to really say or add. I don't think either series of results surprised me. If I'm not too much mistaken the moonshine-as-fuel idea shouldn't have been too surprising considering that's essentially what e85 fuel is, granted at a much different mixture, which also shouldn't make it's much lower efficiency surprising. Running on pure hooch, though, I was a bit surprised how well the modern car ran on it (did Kari say it was or was not a flex-fuel car?) verses the older carburetted engine. I'd think the modern fuel-injected and computerized engine would be more picky. Though if it was flex-fuel car it may have already been build to run off ethanol fuel. Would've been interesting to see if it would have worked as well in a regular gasoline engined modern car, though I suppose it wouldn't be much different than how the middle-aged fuel-injected car behaved. Nothing to say on the Jamie/Adam myth. They showed that explosive substances explode under the right conditions. At least we can say this about this "crossover" episode, it wasn't weighted down with guest-stars from the other series. Kari did wear her cop uniform well. But I still prefer he in the R2D2 dress from last week.
Well, I've never heard of e85 fuel, so I wouldn't have guessed that. But I know some gasoline has ethanol in it, and I know it's a combustible substance, so it's not a huge surprise. She said it was not specifically flex-fuel, but hedged by saying that maybe its computer would be able to adapt. Seems like something they should've made more of an effort to find out.
I've been lurking this thread so far, but this bothered me, because it didn't jibe with what I remembered. So, I decided to do a little digging on the web. The story on the web today is that Hamill and Fisher did the stunt themselves, and that they did it in a single take. This is the most authoritative evidence that I was able to find in my alloted time-frame, though there's probably more authoritative evidence out there somewhere: Interview with Peter Diamond By T-bone Published: December 11, 2000 [...] On your website it says that you 'used a torn pair of trousers to convince Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher to swing across the Death Star chasm in Star Wars.' What's the story there? Just prior to filming this swing another stunt artist and myself had to demonstrate that it was safe to use and rigged correctly. On the demonstration my harness tore. All concerned heard this and both Mark and Carrie were thinking it was unsafe and refused to undertake the swing. From my position above them I said, 'What's the problem?' and I showed them a split in my trousers which had happened previously whilst rehearsing the lightsaber fight. I said, 'Oh, that was my trousers tearing,' and showed them the tear. They believed my lie and we got the swing in one take. (It's unclear to me what website they're actually referring to. Google doesn't locate the quoted text in the question anywhere else on the web today.) So, they did it themselves, case closed? Well, not for me, unfortunately, because I remember watching a documentary back in the day, in which Carrie Fisher said that she'd planned to do the stunt herself until chickening out, and a stunt-woman was brought in at the last second to do it with Mark Hamill. Now, I haven't been able to substantiate that, so it's just as good as in the rumor pile, alright? Still, I'd swear that I remember that. Plus, even if she did say it in an interview once, I suppose it's not out of the question that she was just being dodgy about having actually done it, for whatever reason. I hope that the documentary I'm thinking of hasn't been buried! I did a thread-bomb based on that idea almost a couple years back: Now back to the regularly scheduled discussion....
e85 is another term for flex-fuel/ethanol engines. If I'm not mistaken some "winter blends" of gasoline has *some* ethanol in it but not much since regular engines can't cope with it, but flex-fuel engines are designed to run on ethanol so run completely on e85/flex-fuel which (as stated) isn't nearly as efficient as gasoline.
Honestly I had no idea one way or the other. I just presumed they were stunt doubles because the camera was behind them so you couldn't see their faces. Generally in film if an actor does their own stunt they try and make sure you can actually see it's them. Conversely if it's done with a double they tend to try and shoot it in such a way that you can't see their face. I'm not saying that's *always* the case, but you'd think Lucas would want to take full advantage of actually seeing the actors do the swing. [EDIT] A quick google image search later and it appears they really did do it...or attempt to do it at least. Maybe the swing Fisher chickened out on was the sail barge one in Jedi? I do remember seeing a photo of her with a double wearing the metal bikini. In fact...*scrolls down* there we go.
That's true. I really can't speak for Lucas, of course, but I'll note that the original Star Wars was on a budget and the stunt was done in one take. I suspect that the combination of the tight budget and trying to minimize the number of takes meant keeping everything simple and just covering the basics, especially for that shot in particular. That said, I'm a fan of the raw energy that comes from the almost documentary-style cinematography in a lot of scenes. I know everything is make-believe, but to me somehow it comes off as less staged, that way. I'm squeeing.
I didn't see anything in this thread or in a standalone thread about the Dangerous Toys special that aired after the Moonshiners episode. While Adam and Jamie weren't busting any myths, this was still a hell of a lot of fun to watch. My kids and I particularly loved Jamie's teddy bear army, and it was nice to see the guys get a little more freedom to have some fun. I think this was a one-shot special, but I wouldn't seeing more.
So wait, on that Moonshiners show they aren't even making actual liquor? And Discovery made Mythbusters devote an entire episode to it?? WTF. While they're not my favorite, I can at least understand crossovers with popular or long-running shows like Walking Dead or Deadliest Catch (and I admit I never tire of watching them bust movie myths), but this was just ridiculous. And it was obvious the MB crew had to really stretch to find anything interesting to test. As to the Dangerous Toys special, it was a bit more watchable (and a better use of Adam and Jamie than their last show with the Rube Goldberg machines), but the final battle ended up being pretty weak and anticlimactic, and not really worth all the time and energy devoted toward it.
^It seem after 10 years TV execs have figured out that reality TV is boring, so they've decided to start making stuff up. It's the latest thing, I think they're calling it "fiction". Why nobody thought of it before is mind boggling!
I don't know about that -- it could be that they got a license like the Mythbusters did. The point is that they're not actually doing anything against the law, just pretending to do so. Which, really, should be obvious -- only a fool would think that people actually engaged in illegal activities would show their faces unblurred on camera. But then, that probably sums up the show's target audience. On a network that used to be about science and education. I may cry.
Just got around to watching the Star Wars special. I thought that was a lot of fun not just because we know those scenes from the movies but they were interesting myths as well. Besides that, the rigging of the different tests was a lot of fun as well and I about died when Jaime was done up like Luke. Good stuff.
Movie car myths this week. Pane of glass: Kind of an interesting rig to test the potential for injury to the glass carriers, but I wonder if Adam's rig was maybe too susceptible to "bleeding." For one thing, it seemed to be wrapped in pretty thin plastic; how does that compare to human skin strength? For another, maybe they should've wrapped it in fabric to simulate clothes. Plus, another part of the myth I wish they'd addressed: Would anyone really carry a bare pane of glass across a street that way? Aren't large panes usually put in some kind of wooden framework for transport? SUV vs. RPG: I think this one was badly handled all around. First off, the movie clip didn't show the RPG hitting the SUV head-on; it looked like the vapor trail terminated on the pavement right under the SUV, that the idea was that the explosion went off underneath it and pushed it into the air. Now, I really don't think that would've worked any better, but at least they should've tested it that way, since that was the myth. Second, they seem to have forgotten what "replicate the result" means. It doesn't mean showing us how Hollywood faked the effect. It means trying to determine what it would take in real-world terms to achieve the effect that was shown. So they should've tried to figure out what kind of explosion, if any, could really flip an SUV. I'm just really disappointed in the M7 trio this week. (The fact that they're doing faux-Mythbusters car commercials during the show doesn't help.) Truck vs. cars: Now, this made up for the disappointment. I love it when they bring out their giant dump truck. I'm impressed by how much progress it made smashing through the cars without modification (beyond the super-bumper), although I wonder how its 30,000-pound weight/momentum would compare to an 18-wheeler. (Googles it) Hmm, apparently it's close to the weight of a semi cab plus an empty trailer, but a loaded 18-wheeler can legally be as much as 80,000 lb. So the truck doing the smashing could theoretically have a momentum more than twice of this one's. That would probably have let it make more headway. Still, it would've been nothing like the results they got with the cowcatcher. That was amazing. It was like pulling down a zipper. The lines of cars flew out like they were chained together. It really shows the power of a simple wedge. That is one of the most impressive things they've ever done. I'm a little disappointed that they spoiled it in the season previews, though I can understand why they highlighted it. Oh, and I noticed they've installed a roof hatch in the dump truck's cab. So they no longer have to lift the rear hopper (or whatever that's called -- bucket?) to get into the cab. Good idea.
The "zipper line" of cars with the truck and cow-catcher was a beautiful sight. I agree, one of the coolest and best things they've done. I agree, Christopher, on their test with the panes of glass. Tempered glass is pretty darn "hard" to cut yourself with any more than maybe be a surface scratch. More reliable human analogues in clothes probably would have bore this out that it was fairly "safe" to some degree. I'm sure you'd get scratched up pretty good, sure, but overall I think one would weather it pretty good. The RPG myth didn't bring much to the table. I think most of us have watched this show enough/long enough to know how explosions work especially when versing movie scenes with reality. Which probably is why they didn't "duplicate the result" but just "made it look good." There's been one or two other instances over the years where a "Hollywood Myth" result test was done by simply showing the special effects behind it. The Jr. Team didn't disappoint me in that regard it seemed to be in line with what the show has more or less always done when it comes to some of the more extreme myths. But, really, if they were going to duplicate/test a Fast and Furious franchise myth (which, granted, the RPG vs. SUV stunt is a genre one not specific to the F&F franchise, but it's the clip they used to present the stunt) they should have gone with the bank vault pull from the fifth movie. Which, yeah, we all know is ridiculous and Reel Physics already did the math on but it'd still be fun to see it tested. Sigh. Maybe some day.
But in those cases, that was just the final bit after they'd tried to replicate the result for real and proven it simply couldn't be done. Here, they just skipped that step. They should've demonstrated that an explosion powerful enough to flip a car would more likely tear it apart instead. That would've been the most conclusive way of busting the myth. And it would've let them do more and bigger explosions, so it serves both the science and the spectacle. They just got lazy here.
I was also disappointed that they didn't try to fire the RPG down and under the front of the SUV as shown in the movie clip.