Is this what they call a "hit piece"?

[Mazryonh]

I don't know if this article has been discussed here before (it's from 2009), but clearly a user of the infamous Something Awful forum didn't like some of what he found here on imfdb. You can read it here:

http://www.somethingawful.com/news/imfdb-guns-movies/1/

"Really? There's an imfdb listing for the crossbow but they left out those guns?"

I guess you can't please everyone all the time.

[Spartan198]

Are those overly technical descriptions of the AKM's fire selector position and function on the XXX page really necessary?

[Excalibur]

I'm reading a lot of mean spirited snark from this guy that's both funny and...offensive...probably because I work on IMFDB as well as all of us.

Also as a critic like others, I highly am hostile at people who uses the classic fallacy of countering criticisms with "It's an *insert genre*, it isn't supposed to be taken seriously" argument. As if that's a blank check to be stupid or not care about how to make a film or show or whatever. And that's not directed to just poor gun handling in films, it's directed to the film industry in general. Just because it's the Matrix and it's a stupid movie doesn't excuse bad acting direction (or lack of) to actors. There's suspension of disbelief and then there's bullshit when it comes to bad story writing. I hate these kinds of people that say oh it's just a movie. This is why the Transformers series made a fuck ton of cash than better movies!

And really, I think this guy is missing the point of our site. Yeah a lot of how we do things most likely involve piles of Doritos, mountain dew and ADHD meds, and avoiding our girlfriends but this is what we do. Yeah, I can be offensively snarky too!


I guess sometimes the technical descriptions do seem a bit much...like the XXX page but...it's there for you to read. I seriously don't think there is such a thing as too much gun information.

This guy clearly isn't a gun guy and I mean not even on a basic level. He obviously made this page almost as an attempted to sound like he's a rejected author from Cracked.com


Ok....ok....I'm taking a breath...I'm zen...calm...now excuse me, I need to go to my back yard. I mean...the range.

[SPEMack618]

I'm sort of with Excalibur, I mean we're the IMFDB. (Say that out load. It sounds kinda awesome)

What else would you expect from a website devoted to explaining the firearms used in movies?

In depth analysis of the deeper meaning of the plot in Delta Force?

[Mazryonh]

Originally Posted by SPEMack618

I'm sort of with Excalibur, I mean we're the IMFDB. (Say that out loud. It sounds kinda awesome)

Maybe you feel that way because the last two letters rhyme?

Originally Posted by SPEMack618

What else would you expect from a website devoted to explaining the firearms used in movies?

Perhaps the author was thinking of something a little more academic, then.

Originally Posted by Excalibur

I'm reading a lot of mean spirited snark from this guy that's both funny and...offensive...probably because I work on IMFDB as well as all of us.

Aren't the Something Awful forums famous for this kind of thing?

Originally Posted by Excalibur

Also as a critic like others, I highly am hostile at people who uses the classic fallacy of countering criticisms with "It's an *insert genre*, it isn't supposed to be taken seriously" argument. As if that's a blank check to be stupid or not care about how to make a film or show or whatever. And that's not directed to just poor gun handling in films, it's directed to the film industry in general. Just because it's the Matrix and it's a stupid movie doesn't excuse bad acting direction (or lack of) to actors. There's suspension of disbelief and then there's bullshit when it comes to bad story writing. I hate these kinds of people that say oh it's just a movie. This is why the Transformers series made a fuck ton of cash than better movies!

People make lists of visible/audible goofs found in movies all the time. Sadly it looks like the writer thinks some of the commentary here on IMFDB doesn't count as a valid way of listing immersion-breaking elements of a film.

Speaking of The Matrix's use of Harries techniques, I hope someone makes a mention of Metal Gear Solid 3's similar techniques, except with a "CQC" knife instead of a flashlight.

Originally Posted by Excalibur

I guess sometimes the technical descriptions do seem a bit much...like the XXX page but...it's there for you to read. I seriously don't think there is such a thing as too much gun information.

People are certainly welcome to read only the parts of the wiki that they can handle. That's what the Tables of Contents are for--if they want the barebones experience, they can just read the Tables of Contents and skim through the screenshots to get the basic idea.

Originally Posted by Excalibur

This guy clearly isn't a gun guy and I mean not even on a basic level. He obviously made this page almost as an attempted to sound like he's a rejected author from Cracked.com

I wonder if the article's author would consider the amount of technical expertise and attention to detail that is required to keep modern small arms in working order "aspergian" as well. In reality, if you don't get it right on a regular basis, you might end up like that scene in Harry Brown where the titular character goes "You failed to maintain your weapon, son." Or you might do something like try to chamber a .300 BLK round in a 5.56mm AR-15, and end up with half your face missing once the trigger's pulled. And aren't quite a lot of accidental shootings occurring in real life because someone didn't completely unload a gun before cleaning it or putting it away?

[Excalibur]

I think none of us considered ourselves "academics" of guns. I really think we should all be affectionately called gun nuts. Even calling ourselves "gun aficionados" sounds kinda pretentious.


And really the Metal Gear Solid series is a lot of faux military fantasies abound and should never be taken seriously. The holding a knife with your handgun sounds cool but not really fun in practice and doing it while holding a long arm is even stupider like in MGS4. I am so glad the Snake character stopped doing the knife thing in MGS5 judging from the trailers, which there's a continuity disconnect since the Snake from MGS3, PW and 5 are a different guy to Solid Snake from MGS1, 2 and 4...and it seems like Solid snake started out without the CQC knife technique but suddenly does it and Big Boss Snake started the trend but drops it in later games

[SPEMack618]

When I here the terms academics used with guns, I think of gentlemen like Elmer Keith and Jack O'Connor.

I prefer the term firearms enthusiast. Which is really just a PC term for gun nut.

"Ma'am, where with the IMFDB" sounds cool to me because it could almost be something said in a Larry Corriea novel. Whom I'm binge reading at present.

[Mazryonh]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

I think none of us considered ourselves "academics" of guns. I really think we should all be affectionately called gun nuts. Even calling ourselves "gun aficionados" sounds kinda pretentious.

I meant "academic" as though the wiki were an academic resource for guns in motion media, a "Jane's recognition guide to" kind of thing.

Originally Posted by Excalibur

And really the Metal Gear Solid series is a lot of faux military fantasies abound and should never be taken seriously. The holding a knife with your handgun sounds cool but not really fun in practice and doing it while holding a long arm is even stupider like in MGS4.

I just meant to say that if we can complain about an actor's poor attempt at a Harries technique, then we can question what appears to be an attempt to turn a Harries technique with a knife instead of a flashlight into a viable fighting stance. Getting a screenshot of that particular ingame cutscene could take some doing, though.

Originally Posted by SPEMack618

When I here the terms academics used with guns, I think of gentlemen like Elmer Keith and Jack O'Connor.

Don't those guys normally focus on firearms technique rather than things like recognizing them in motion media and critiquing the plausibility of their appearances and use?

Originally Posted by SPEMack618

"Ma'am, where with the IMFDB" sounds cool to me because it could almost be something said in a Larry Corriea novel. Whom I'm binge reading at present.

I'll believe that phrase is cool when it gets the non-armory-affiliated members among us passes into SHOT show or the like.

[MT2008]

I remember when that article came out. I'll admit to being pretty offended at the time. As others have observed, this guy is mean-spirited. He's also not as funny or as clever as he thinks he is (was...some of his later stuff is better).

In retrospect, though, IMFDB has grown so much since this guy's piece that I think we got the last laugh. This guy called us a "wiki-clone", but the reality is that we've now earned a permanent place in the hearts of gun owners and anyone interested in the entertainment industry.

[Mazryonh]

Originally Posted by MT2008

In retrospect, though, IMFDB has grown so much since this guy's piece that I think we got the last laugh. This guy called us a "wiki-clone", but the reality is that we've now earned a permanent place in the hearts of gun owners and anyone interested in the entertainment industry.

How exactly has the wiki "earned a permanent place in the hearts of gun owners"? Have we hit it big in the news publications used by the gun industry yet? Do you have any links for that?

Like I said earlier, can a high-level IMFDB affiliate or staff member use that association alone to get into SHOT show or the like?

This forum clearly isn't as active as many internet gun forums are either. I know that membership has to be requested both for this wiki and this forum, but the traffic level here doesn't appear to be very high compared to that of many gun forums. Of course, not knowing the server stats, I can't know for certain just where we stand in terms of traffic to the wiki/forum.