Note to Self: Never steal Tom Cruise's Briefcase!

I thought Tom Cruise was getting a bit lame then I heard he owned a '66 Mustang Shelby GT350 fastback..... :cool:

800px-66_Shelby_GT350.jpg


2007-10-27_091302_1aCoffee.gif

NAA.
 
That scene is pretty far ferched...I thought it looked a bit staged even the first time I saw it in the movie theater a few years ago. The second guy looks like he's touching fimself rather going for him gun....
 
All the gun and fight scenes in "Collateral" were coordinated by the same guy. This same guy did all the fight and gun scenes in the movie "Taken" with Liam Neeson. I cannot remember his name.

If you want to see what the whole training package is, find the video series called "Inside the Crucible", available at some stores. They were $45 this weekend, 4 parts.

Second guy is at a disadvantage as he was expecting Tom to do what most sheep do...comply with the big bad guy with a gun. The sudden explosion of activity, since Tom had a plan, would catch him off guard. When Tom pounced, he did a simple avoid, fired 2 shots at low retention at BG1 then 3 shots at the "third eye" moving out to full extension into BG2. BG1 took both shots to the hip area and would not yet be dead, just badly wounded. Just after the animated avatar (thanks mildot) ends, Tom puts one more round into BG1's head.

Just my thoughts.
 
Despite the criticisms I've read over the years, I think this scene is very well done. What it illustrates, and quite well, is: mindset, training, OODA, reactionary gap, etc. It is accurate in that respect.

BG1 uses his pistol to intimidate and threaten only; he is not a shooter or tactician.

BG2 is the sidekick along for the ride and seems almost afraid to show his handgun. His hand comes to rest on his gun but he does not draw/point it because he fails to classify the threat correctly and believes it's adequately covered by BG1. By the time BG2 IDs threat, he is already being shot, as he begins what would have been processing > decision components.

Vincent is the hunter. With training, experience, and muscle memory, he's already aware of what he's going to do, how he's going to do it.. several critical steps ahead of BG1-2.

If you watch the scene carefully, you will see that BG2's gun is never displayed until he falls and it can be seen in his hand on the ground. When the engagement starts, he turns away from the action as a natural physiological reaction to sudden/unexpected light and sound.

BG1 does have his handgun out, pointed at Vincent, but his physical and verbal cues support the conclusion that he is not going to fire. He is no match for Vincent who takes the threat (gun) off-line and executes a very quick Speed Rock.
 
Hi Polearm,
The man you are thinking of is Mick GOULD, who's background is with 22SAS. He has worked on numerous films as a tech advisor, and is almost exclusively the advisor for Michael MANN films. MANN draws on various sources for his firearms/combat scenes. He has firearms training himself and also has retained competitive shooters and military spec ops people as advisors/actors for his films and TV work.

The Jim ZUBIENA clip earlier in this thread is from the Miami Vice TV show, which you'll recall is directed by MANN as well.

Best regards,
TR1
 
Despite the criticisms I've read over the years, I think this scene is very well done. What it illustrates, and quite well, is: mindset, training, OODA, reactionary gap, etc. It is accurate in that respect.

BG1 uses his pistol to intimidate and threaten only; he is not a shooter or tactician.

BG2 is the sidekick along for the ride and seems almost afraid to show his handgun. His hand comes to rest on his gun but he does not draw/point it because he fails to classify the threat correctly and believes it's adequately covered by BG1. By the time BG2 IDs threat, he is already being shot, as he begins what would have been processing > decision components.

Vincent is the hunter. With training, experience, and muscle memory, he's already aware of what he's going to do, how he's going to do it.. several critical steps ahead of BG1-2.

If you watch the scene carefully, you will see that BG2's gun is never displayed until he falls and it can be seen in his hand on the ground. When the engagement starts, he turns away from the action as a natural physiological reaction to sudden/unexpected light and sound.

BG1 does have his handgun out, pointed at Vincent, but his physical and verbal cues support the conclusion that he is not going to fire. He is no match for Vincent who takes the threat (gun) off-line and executes a very quick Speed Rock.

I've just learned a life time of knowledge.
 
Despite the criticisms I've read over the years, I think this scene is very well done. What it illustrates, and quite well, is: mindset, training, OODA, reactionary gap, etc. It is accurate in that respect.

BG1 uses his pistol to intimidate and threaten only; he is not a shooter or tactician.

BG2 is the sidekick along for the ride and seems almost afraid to show his handgun. His hand comes to rest on his gun but he does not draw/point it because he fails to classify the threat correctly and believes it's adequately covered by BG1. By the time BG2 IDs threat, he is already being shot, as he begins what would have been processing > decision components.

Vincent is the hunter. With training, experience, and muscle memory, he's already aware of what he's going to do, how he's going to do it.. several critical steps ahead of BG1-2.

If you watch the scene carefully, you will see that BG2's gun is never displayed until he falls and it can be seen in his hand on the ground. When the engagement starts, he turns away from the action as a natural physiological reaction to sudden/unexpected light and sound.

BG1 does have his handgun out, pointed at Vincent, but his physical and verbal cues support the conclusion that he is not going to fire. He is no match for Vincent who takes the threat (gun) off-line and executes a very quick Speed Rock.

TR1 points out the finer details of the scene. Excellent explanation and attention to detail.:agree:

TDC
 
That scene is pretty far ferched...I thought it looked a bit staged even the first time I saw it in the movie theater a few years ago. The second guy looks like he's touching fimself rather going for him gun....

To untrained eyes !! We shot paper and arent alowed CCW so what do we know .
 
umm this is a movie not a real live video... :rolleyes: what's the point of rationaziling it??

here's what happened; the guy put his hand as if he's going for the gun but he wasn't supposed to draw so he didn't, and just waited to get shot my Crouse's character... it looks fake because it is!!! Come on people!

what's next WWE is real?? :confused:
 
Last edited:
umm this is a movie not a real live video... :rolleyes: what's the point of rationaziling it??

here's what happened they rehearsed it several times than shot it, it looks fake because it is!!!

what's next WWE is real?? :confused:
The point is that it doesn't look fake if you give it a second thought.
 
umm this is a movie not a real live video... :rolleyes: what's the point of rationaziling it??

here's what happened; the guy put his hand as if he's going for the gun but he wasn't supposed to draw so he didn't, and just waited to get shot my Crouse's character... it looks fake because it is!!! Come on people!

what's next WWE is real?? :confused:

The draw from BG 2 appeared to be a little slower than it could have or should have been. That being said, the situation called for Vincent to down both guys. Aside from shooting the scene the way the director wanted, the skills demonstrated are 100% viable. That is the point behind rationalizing it. I guess the same could be said for IPSC or IDPA considering both get walk throughs and there is no possibility of the target moving.

Oh and wrestling in all its forms(outside of olympic wresting) is f*cking retarded.

TDC
 
The draw from BG 2 appeared to be a little slower than it could have or should have been. That being said, the situation called for Vincent to down both guys. Aside from shooting the scene the way the director wanted, the skills demonstrated are 100% viable. That is the point behind rationalizing it. I guess the same could be said for IPSC or IDPA considering both get walk throughs and there is no possibility of the target moving.

Oh and wrestling in all its forms(outside of olympic wresting) is f*cking retarded.

TDC

Not very often that I like TDC's posts. I like this one. No offense TDC. I shoot a glock if it makes you less upset with me.
 
I first thought it was pretty cool Tom Cruise practiced as much as he did for that scene, and was decently impressed with his speed - that was until I watched it frame for frame on my player. If you look closely, you'll see that when he sweeps away his jacket, the pistol is just sitting precariously 'in' the holster, such so that the trigger guard isn't even touching it. :rolleyes:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AA_dgRdDhk <-- Real CCW with good end. Skip to about 0:25 to get to the good stuff.

Good on the guy keeping his head and thinking it through. Using the other teller to conceal drawing his own weapon whilst appearing natural to the assailant, then moving aside for a clear firing line to the bad guy and putting 3 cleaning into said BG.

A little back story on that vid. The guy doing the shooting(good guy that is) had shot that handgun a couple times before that incident. The scumbag fired one or two shots(can't remember) he hit nothing. The scumbag caught all three rounds from the clerk...He used a Glock by the way.;)

TDC
 
Back
Top Bottom