SHP Forums

If you watch enough American prime-time dramas, you're bound to find a lot of ridiculous stuff. Some of the worst is when TV writers attempt to work technology into the story, specifically tech that revolves around computers and video games.

This article, entitled "8 Scenes That Prove Hollywood Doesn't Get Technology", showcases some of the most jaw dropping, mind boggling and overall idiotic stuff that's been written.

There's a reason I don't watch any of these shows

I love NCIS...why? because it stars Mark Harmon. Don't like NCIS: LA so much...why?...because it doesn't have Mark Harmon.

Meh, it's Hollywood. For shows like CSI and such - they can't really identify a finger print in a machine within 30 minutes. But they have to do it to make the show work.

You have to throw believability out the window, and suspend belief. You're watching an entertainment show, not a documentary.

I say this because I watch Leverage, which isn't mentioned, but could easily fall into one of those "categories" that doesn't get technology.

Tawmis wrote:Meh, it's Hollywood. For shows like CSI and such - they can't really identify a finger print in a machine within 30 minutes. But they have to do it to make the show work.

Apparently some people don't, which has led to something called the "CSI Effect" in court rooms. This has caused a big problem for prosecutors since jurors don't understand why they can't be shown evidence the same way it's done on TV.

Tawmis wrote:You have to throw believability out the window, and suspend belief. You're watching an entertainment show, not a documentary.

Okay, I understand the whole "time limit" issue, but some of this stuff is just plain stupid. Even if you've never played a video game in your life, you've probably used a keyboard or at least a typewriter. I can't think of anyone who'd say having TWO people on ONE keyboard works well, yet the writers want viewers to think that's the case.

Part of the reason is that many of the writers and video editors have a disproportionate share of Mac users that have a distorted view of the Mac's place in the working world. Most of the time you see a hacker or a scientist in shows and movies they are using Macs. For some fields Macs tend to be used, but rarely by hackers or non-artistic work places. Most of these machines are going to be Windows or Linux machines. I know that Tawm can confirm that Mac users tend to know less than the average users. Anyone who has done telephone tech support hates that Mac call, not because that Macs are hard to troubleshoot, but because of the level of ignorance of the user. Additionally, with at least pre OSX, network admins often said that the easiest thing was to get two Macs talking to each other, while the hardest thing was to get a Mac to talk to anything other than a Mac. This with small market share make the notion of a hacker being a Mac only user is ludicrous, yet when they show the screen of a hacker, scientist, researcher or workplace/industrial setting, it is usually a Mac screenshot.

Then there is the nonsense of the display on a monitor being projected onto the face of the user as if there was a lens focusing the display on the face in stead of dull florescent like light bathing the face as in real life.

The solution of time constraints would be easy to deal with if the writers stopped long enough to rub two neurons together. Time can easily be irrelevant. The show starts with scene 1. Scene 2 can take place at anytime beyond, even years later. Easy enough to fit even years into an hour's show.

The solution is simple: watch only HBO