Movie/film suggestions.

@thecarpathian 

 Want to know another reason to not like Florida? Know what’s the only paperwork required to buy a pistol from a private individual down there? Money. That’s it. No background check, no government paperwork, no registering it, nothing.

Fl is not the only state like that.  Tn as well, or at least I know it used to be.

 Even crazier? They just did away with requiring a concealed/carry permit. That’s right! No safety class to pass,

Again, this is not only in Fl.  In Vt no CCW is required. (But Vt does require a FFL for private handgun sales.)  In Pa no classes are required, but one does have to pass the same background check required to purchase a handgun.  That and $20 and you are good for five years.

What goes into a gun is called a cartridge. It consists of 4 parts- the casing, the primer, the powder, and the projectile (bullet). A blank consists of 3 out of the four so it sounds and acts identically to a full cartridge without discharging a projectile.

Well, @thecarpathian , as I attempted to explain a couple of posts ago (and probably butchered the explanation), a blank does NOT act exactly identical to a live round when used in a semi-automatic.  A semi-auto requires back pressure on the expelling gas (gas produced by the ignition and combustion within the cartridge) and the bullet in front of the expelling gas is what creates that back pressure; without that back pressure, ALL the gas will simply expel out the muzzle in lieu of returning back to operate the semi automatic action.  Hence, the modification needed at the muzzle in order to fire blanks in a semi-auto mode versus re-cocking between shots fired.  (Manual re-cocking can be done, but then you are no longer operating in semi-auto.)  The same would hold true for a semiauto handgun operating in blowback--without backpressure the fired cartridge would not be pushed back and the handgun would have to be racked manually in order eject the spent round and to fire the follow up shot.  One of my semi-auto hand guns is basically junk, and I have to rack it manually after each shot, because, for whatever reason, what is supposed to be going on in there with the blow back is not working as per what I just attempted to explain.)

I think that may be a clearer explanation than my last one.  And "backpressure" is generally an automotive exhaust term, and I don’t know if the gun guys use it, but off the cuff it was what I could think of for explanation purposes.  I know how different mechanical things work, but sadly, I am often challenged when trying to use words to describe.  I often draw pictures instead.

Actually, a blank is a fully functioning cartridge without the bullet.

What most people refer to as ’bullets’-aren’t. That is just the little projectile that comes out of the gun. What goes into a gun is called a cartridge. It consists of 4 parts- the casing, the primer, the powder, and the projectile (bullet). A blank consists of 3 out of the four so it sounds and acts identically to a full cartridge without discharging a projectile.

@thecarpathian , this is what I was trying to describe to @gano a few hours ago when he and I were discussing negligent discharges on movie sets and war re-enactments/thanks to google:

https://thegunzone.com/how-to-modify-a-semi-auto-to-shoot-blanks/

"Dedicated Blank Firing Adapter (BFA): A BFA is crucial for reliable cycling. This device attaches to the muzzle of the firearm and constricts the gas pressure, providing the necessary backpressure for the bolt to cycle properly. BFAs are usually designed to be caliber specific and readily identifiable. Using the incorrect BFA can cause damage to the firearm or create a dangerous situation."

And evidently "backpressure" was an okay descriptor.  From what I read on the site where I just found this, there are a few other ways to modify a barrel or muzzle in order to fire blanks in a semi-automatic mode, but the one above was the one I was thinking about at the time.  But the thing is, with all of the methods, a live round (meaning one with a bullet attached to the neck of a cartridge) fired through a barrel modified as such, would absolutely have to result in a catastrophic barrel failure.  I think it would be pretty nasty.

Yes, @thecarpathian , Baldwin had (what I believe was a single action type of) a revolver chambered in .45 Long Colt (which is not a round to be sneezed at, although not as powerful as a .44 magnum) and blanks and live rounds would have fired interchangeably out of that.  I am not at all familiar with the make that they stated that the revolver was.

Another example of what I was attempting to explain would be the rifles that the Honor Guards typically use at military funerals.  Not that I go to that many, the last one was my dad’s almost ten years ago to the day, but at my Dad’s, the Guard was using M1 Garands (which are semi-automatic) for the three-volley salute, and after each volley they had to manually re-cock their rifles prior to the next volley.  Meaning that their Garands had never been modified to fire blanks in a semi-auto mode, but had they been firing live rounds at my Dad’s funeral (almost surprised they were not, considering the nature of that town) they could have fired their volleys in a semi-auto mode without manually re-cocking.

Anyway, I am glad that the explanation I attempted worked for you, as I frequently struggle converting my mechanical understandings into words.  Just a couple of more "fun facts" if you are interested--on the subject of the .45 LC and the .44 mag, a .44 mag will drop right into the cylinder of a .45 LC (but not vice versa).  I only know this because I have tried it with mine, and it would PROBABLY discharge, but I would never try to actually fire a .44 mag out of a .45 LC because I am about 99.9% positive that the .45 LC frame would NEVER withstand the pressure.

And back to semiautomatic rifles and rifles that are not semiautos (such as a manually operated bolt action), given that explanation I attempted a few posts ago, if you were to take one of each with a barrel of identical length firing an identical load, the semiauto (the "gas gun") would have a somewhat lower muzzle velocity (although I do not know the actual specs) than the bolt action, because a percentage of the expanding gas (and I don’t know the actual percentage) is bled off to work the action of the semiautomatic.  Although with that typed, back maybe 13 or 14 years ago when I was spending a lot of time at the range, I would frequently run into this guy I liked who practically lived there.  One of his (many) guns was an AR10 chambered in .308, and the last time I talked to him he told me he had gone from being able to hit eggs at 600 yards with it to golf balls!  I guess I sounded a bit skeptical, because he said, "I never said that I was hitting them with EVERY shot, Matt."  But a gun that would do that is a pretty good shooting gun regardless of whether a "gas gun" or not.  And I suppose it is possible that maybe he was making those shots--after all, guns were his thing and maybe his only thing and he had an EXTREMELY nice scope and he worked up his own loads.

The last "fun fact" I’ll throw out is about the loads.  Understanding what I was attempting to explain about the expanding gas pushing the bullet down the barrel, for every given load there is an ideal barrel length.  As with a barrel that is shorter than ideal for a given load, the bullet will exit the muzzle while the gas behind it is still expanding and energy will be unused and wasted.  While with a barrel that is too long for a given load, the bullet will be still traveling down the barrel after the gas behind it has ceased expanding, and now the barrel is acting as a drag on the bullet.  So the barrel with a chambered cartridge is basically like a calibrated open-ended pipe bomb, and in the case of a semiauto, some of the energy is designed to be bled off to make the gun fire without being MANUALLY re-cocked between shots.

@hce1 

@immatthewj Elephant may bowl you over; it’s gripping. Snowpiercer is a rollercoaster ride, a genre in which I think Bong Joon Ho excels. Get out the popcorn and hold on. I haven’t seen American dreamer, but I’m a big fan of Matt Dillon. And, I, too, am a current Peacock subscriber. I’ll throw it into negotiations with my wife.

Elephant is now on top of my short list.  It will be happening this week I am pretty sure.  As far as Matt Dillon, Haunted Heart (2024) actually has Matt Dillon as a main star of the movie, and it seems to be sort of intended to be a bit of an intense psychological thriller, but after watching American Dreamer (2022) last night, with Matt Dillon in a supporting role as Peter Dinklage’s (with Shirley Mac Laine as a costar) real estate agent, I thought that Dillon was better in the latter.  American Dreamer is a bit of a dark comedy, and imo this was Matt Dillon at his best (even in a supporting role) with his vocal inflections and the way he would annunciate certain words and the facial expressions (grimaces and such) that he would put on when he delivered his lines in excellent form.  (Danny Glover also had a smaller supporting role as a private detective that Matt Dillon arranged for Peter Dinklage, and he was quite good as well.  There were many laugh out loud moments in this one.)

@gano , first off, there are a couple of members I am trying not to interact on the threads that they are on, because when I do my posts seem to have about a 75% deletion rate.  I won’t mention any screen names, because that would probably be enough to get this post deleted, but the responses of mine that got deleted were no worse than the posts I was replying to.  Think skinned snowflakes.  Then there was texas-jerry, who seems to be back in another reincarnation, and I was trading caustic responses’ with him on a thread, and guess who’s got deleted.  The post you alluded to is actually back, and my curiosity is piqued as to what the two that are still gone were about.  Although this thread has meandered on & off topic, I felt it was one of the more civilized threads going on A’gon and the disagreements (if there were any) were stated reasonably.

Anyway:

I will watch the Elephant and the American Dreamer. I also should add Albino Alligator to the Matt Dillon list. Irresistible in my opinion.

Elephant is on my list for this week (thanks to @hce1 ) as the trailer looked mesmerizing.  As far as American Dreamer, if you like Matt Dillon, you are going to love this one.  As I previously typed, he has a supporting role as a real estate agent, but this is classic Matt Dillon.  If I had ever forgot why I like him so much, this film reminded me.  Man, but he is a great actor.  On edit: I just googled Albino Alligator, and I am pretty sure I have watched that one before.

Anyway, I hope you don’t bail; your perspective is well stated and interesting.  Regardless, I understand that you gotta do what you gotta do--there is a reason I will never click on audio asylum again, and that reason is quite similar to what you are stating.  And I will only say, fwiw, that the moderation is way better here than there.  But I wish you well and hope you reconsider.

the game began @immatthewj , they are removing comments that mention removing comments and the painful and disruptive moderation. 

Wow, they got one of mine also, @gano .  I have no idea what I would have typed in that one that offended the dainty sensibilities of some thin skinned snowflake.

@gano , momentarily back to Matt Dillon, did you enjoy Crash (2004)?  That movie turned into another one of my Matt Dillon favorites. I thought that the casting was quite good, which included Don Cheadle, Sandra Bullock, Tony Danza, Jennifer Esposito, William Fichtner (who is an actor I really like), Brendan Fraser, Terrence Howard, Michael Pena, Ryan Phillippa. . . .

As we were discussing Phil Spector and Rebecca Pidgeon's roles several posts ago, here is something you may enjoy--her doing a live cover of Spanish Harlem:

Spanish Harlem

I found Matt Dillon to be quite believable in his portrayal of a police officer.

For its time: 'The Big Chill'. 

I remember thinking that it had a good soundtrack.

I know this is a touchy subject so I'll let this be the last I say on it.

@nonoise , @gano , and you have been discussing it and sharing your disagreements in a civil manner.  

He can play the scumbag and the nice guy in one person like very few. 

I agree with you that he completely nailed that in Crash, @gano .  He always comes off to me as real--often as someone who I think it would be fun to know.  Or maybe it is that he comes off as someone who I think would be fun to know in real life because of the way he comes off in movies.  It’s the little things and scenes he does, things and scenes that can go almost unnoticed that are part of why I appreciate him to the extent I do.  For example, after the intense interaction/confrontation at the beginning of shift he had with his ex-rookie partner after they were split up, the jovial interaction that immediately followed with his new Hispanic partner he was going to be riding with that day.  He is a master at delivering his lines.

As a matter of fact, although I thought that some of the vignettes or sub-stories were stronger than others, I felt that the whole cast did a fine job. 

William Fichtner is another actor  who I have really come to appreciate after watching him over the years, and although his role wasn’t really that big, I thought that he also was one who nailed it when interacting with Don Cheadle.  I am also generally a fan of Sandra Bullock.  

The film was fraught with irony.   

yes what I like about him is his range, that you wouldn’t assume from his smug charm, from Something About Mary to Singles. 

@gano , Something About Mary is a great example in my opinion.  It did not affect me in any profound way, it had no deep meaning or underlying serious message that I could ascertain, but I certainly did not consider watching it a waste of time because I found it entertaining (sometimes hilarious) and I am sure that I laughed out loud frequently.  Ben Stiller was good (as he frequently is) but I maintain that there are other actors who probably could have done well with his part.  Matt Dillon brought something to his role of a devious/sleazy PI who was infatuated/obsessed with Mary that had a flavor to it that I am not sure who else would have done it as nicely.  

I remember this particular interaction so well that I found it on a site that quotes dialogue from films:

Matt Dillon:  Really, it’s only a side thing for my true passion.
Cameron Diaz:  And what’s that?
Dillon:  I work with retards.
Diaz:  Isn’t that a little politically incorrect?

Dillon:  Yeah, maybe, but hell, no one’s gonna tell me who I can and can’t work with.

And that is great dialogue, and anyone could have delivered it, but not everyone would have pulled it off as casually and easily while expressing how shallow his character is as Matt Dillon did. 

In American Dreamer, which is basically a lighthearted comedy with some warm fuzziness and redemption worked in as it progressed, there was a subtle interaction between Dinklage and Dillon that particularly stuck with me. Not a spoiler, but Dillon plays a somewhat flamboyant and successful real estate guy who is helping his not so successful and cynical (versus flamboyant) friend, who is played by Dinklage, check out what appears to be the deal of a lifetime on a property that would normally be way out of Dinklage’s league.   Part of the deal is that the current owner, Shirley Maclaine, gets to live in the main portion of the estate while Dinklage is relegated to a small room within the house until Maclaine’s death.  Over drinks in a bar, Dillon explains to Dinklage that Maclaine wants to die in her own home and not in a convalescent home.  I cannot find the direct quote, but he relates to Dinklage that convalescent homes are horrible; he briefly pauses and says that his mom is in one.  That loses a lot in translation, but basically this wealthy real estate guy just told his buddy, "Nursing homes are horrific--I know because I put my mom in one."  Then the film pans to another scene.  A tiny scene that said a lot to me as a viewer, and part of why it worked so well for me was the subtle inflection in his voice, not sad but impressed by how miserable the condition of the place he put his mom in, and the momentary expression on his face.

Subtle.

Anyway . . . ramble on . . . but what I was getting at was that with that quick scene Dillon successfully continued to paint more of the picture of who he was portraying, and he made me laugh at the same time.  Which is getting back to what I said about the little/subtle things that I think he frequently does as an actor that makes him so good, and I felt that Something About Mary had many of those Matt Dillon moments.
 

I just took a look, @nonoise , and it appears I can rent Warfare for 5.99.  I have got Elephant at the top of my "pay for list", but I will put Warfare as #2.  (You may be interested in Elephant yourself; the trailer makes me think that it is based on Columbine.)

 In the end, things look rather fruitless considering what they sacrificed but that is basically the cost of war. It should be required viewing for all the gung-ho wannabes out there.

That was me when I was growing up.  From reading some of your posts, I think I am about 5 years younger than you, meaning that I was growing up under the shadow of Vietnam and the draft, but in the end the US was out before I was old enough.  But I was like Tom Cruise’s (nationalistic in his youth) character in Born On The Fourth Of July--I thought it was my duty, and I guess I couldn't wait to be old enough to go somewhere and be a hero.  Many times since then I have given thanks that I was born in ’59 and not ’49 . . . talk about fruitless.

You were closer than I was, @nonoise .  I didn’t graduate HS until ’77 and by that time I actually had a pretty good part time job (36 hours a week for a high school kid!), and after I did graduate they gave me a raise (five and change an hour!) and put me on full time.  So when I did join the AF in ’78, it was more because I needed to get out of a certain small town in Montana and didn’t see higher education as something that would work for me, as opposed to it being my waning sense of nationalism.  A month or so before I was inducted I went to see The Boys In Company C (1978), and I remember thinking to myself that I was glad: 1) that Vietnam was over, and 2) that I did not join the Marine Corps.

but the way things are going now, at least I got to live a good, normal American life. 

My sentiments exactly.  At least I got to live the best days of my life when things here were not perfect, but all in all, still pretty good in comparison.   

PBS has aired an excellent 10 part documentary series titled The Vietnam War (2017-2018) narrated by Peter Coyote.  The total futility of our involvement, along with the casualty count on both sides and the civilians, is incredible and depressing.  I've watched all ten episodes twice, at different times, and both times I could not stop watching.

My younger sister’s boyfriend wasn’t so lucky, and ended up in Nam. But not for long; he took a bullet to his forehead on his first trek into the jungle..

What a waste that was.  So much waste of life.  Blood and treasure and more blood.

I found the statement made by Francis Ford Coppola about his film Apocalypse Now extremely despicable: "My film is not about Vietnam. My film is Vietnam." Unbelievable! In addition to his statement being so offensive and ridiculous, his film is a bloated, pompous, pretentious pos. IMO Full Metal Jacket and The Deer Hunter are much better movies about the war.

I can respect your point of view, @bdp24 ; however, I remember being transfixed by it; the whole trippy and lawless atmosphere it conveyed sucked me in and put me on the boat with Sheen and his crew.  For many years it remained one of my all time favorites, up there with Pat Garrett And Billy The Kid.  I had a friend (about my age) who didn’t feel quite as strongly as you do about it, but he much preferred Platoon to Apocalypse Now (as the latter did nothing for him), and like you he really enjoyed Full Metal Jacket and The Deer Hunter. (I think what he really enjoyed about The Deer Hunter were the Russian Roulette scenes . . . he found that fascinating, and I will say no more about that aspect.) 

But then again, I remember I was in the AF when Apocalypse Now came out, and I worked with a vet in the hangar who loved it; he said it reminded him of what it was like to be in Southeast Asia at the time.  (It is worth pointing out that he was in the AF and stationed in Thailand working on fighters during that time as opposed to humping through the jungle with a M-16.)  There were scenes that I found to be intense, and I find the whole backstory behind the making of the film to be quite interesting, but looking at it objectively, where I think it may fail as a film, is it tells a story without giving the audience someone to really care about.  A movie that winds up moving me so much I cannot bring myself to watch it anymore, is Casualties Of War.  I find watching the rape and murder of innocence to depress me even more than I am in my normal state of mental malaise.