What are your thoughts on Grenade images on movie pages?

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by AdAstra2009

I guess that would be appropriate.
Of course then we would have to relabel all the M-67 grenades as M-69 training grenades...or would we

Well M67 is what they are supposed to be, by they aren't. They're FAKE M67 grenades (just like we list "Fake Uzi" or "Fake M16A2") and then we have to list what they actually are. But those can be done on a page by page basis. It's funny. ALL explosive ordnance in movies & TV are obviously NOT the real deal. No one uses land mines for real in shows. No one uses actual real grenades (and usually the SFX guys make them into 'nuclear grenades' in that their explosions are way too big than they are in real life).

It just seems to go against the grain of what we do for firearms.

[Spartan198]

I think it's fine to picture the prop and describe it as standing in for the real thing. Or we could split the difference and picture both the prop and the real grenade for comparison purposes.

[Ace Oliveira]

I think we should use the Prop pictures. However, we could use a picture of the real thing to show people the diferences between the real thing and the prop. Basically, what AdAstra said.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Ace Oliveira

I think we should use the Prop pictures. However, we could use a picture of the real thing to show people the diferences between the real thing and the prop. Basically, what AdAstra said.

I concur. This is IMFDB. We want what movies use, not necessarily what's used in real life, if differences apply.

[Rockwolf66]

I know that on Futureweapons and a couple of other "reality" shows they use real grenades to demonstrate things. But as MPM said in Movies and on television they use fakes and they should be labled as such.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Rockwolf66

I know that on Futureweapons and a couple of other "reality" shows they use real grenades to demonstrate things. But as MPM said in Movies and on television they use fakes and they should be labled as such.

And personally, I was against us having a page for FutureWeapons (and all the other reality shows) in the first place.

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by MT2008

And personally, I was against us having a page for FutureWeapons (and all the other reality shows) in the first place.

I concur. Shows that are basically 'documentaries' on new military weapons technology or historical ones, have NOTHING to do with the background work of movie armorers in film and television or graphics artists in VGs & Anime. I've always hated them, because there is no 'craft' involved in 'borrowing' the latest and greatest guns and ordnance from the Army. None of the REST of us can ever get that, and there is no real effort involved. I remember when some members started listing Television series about military events in which ALL of the images were real News footage. It was a complete waste of time. I guarantee you, NO viewer will 'wonder' what random Muslim terrorist is using in a quick clip from a fight somewhere in the Middle east from an Al Jazeerah Feed.

So these reality shows in essence, create a whole NEW CLASS of weapons that IMFDB has to waste server space on, even though no one will EVER use them or see them in films or other entertainment. I've always said, "IMFDB is NOT "The history of Guns website", but a lot of folks don't comprehend what that exactly means.....

[predator20]

Originally Posted by MT2008

And personally, I was against us having a page for FutureWeapons (and all the other reality shows) in the first place.

Another thing about those shows. They tell you what the weapon is, no need to identify it. Unlike a movie or TV show. So what's the use?