FBI guy writes:
> Saw Air Force One this weekend. Loved it. I think it was the best movie
> I've seen this summer, but considering that I've only seen MiB and Nothing
> to Lose, that is not very high praise. I'd give it a solid A. You knew
> everything was going to be fine, but it still was a nail-biter.
> I do feel that it is necessary to critique some of the technical
> aspects of the film, however:
> 1) In the scene where they blow open the cockpit door, I have
> several questions. Where did they get the C-4? I assume that the Secret
> Service doesn't routinely issue it. Bomb dogs would have been able to smell
> it when the passengers borded. Also, they detinated it by shooting it --
> that won't work. Plastic explosives can only be detinated using a blasting
> cap of some kind, shooting it does nothing!! That's why the military likes
> it. You give one grunt a backpack full of C-4 and as long as he doesn't
> stand too close to the guy with the backpack full of detinators, nothing can
> happen. C-4 is so stable that the guys in the army will cook with it!!!
> 2) The MP-5 submachine gun. The weapons of choice in the movie
> were the sig-saur p-226 and the H&K MP-5 submachine gun. I notice that
> throughout the movie that people were getting shot THROUGH their body armor
> with the MP-5. As you all know, a submachine gun fires hand gun ammo,
> that's what separates it from a machine gun, which fires rifle ammo. The 9
> mm bullets from the mp-5 would not penetrate the body armor.
> 3) Refueling explosion. This was just plain silly. Does anyone
> find it unusual that your local gas station has breakaway gas hoses, but the
> airforce does not? I'll guarantee you that there are breakaway nozzels on
> those things. Also, I loved it when the nozzel scraped against the hull of
> AF1 and caused a spark. Now the airforce may be stupid enough to no have
> break away nozzels, but I'll bet everything I have that they're aluminum.
> Thus we have a spark created by aluminum rubbing on aluminum. If anyone can
> do that, I'll be impressed. Finally, the refueling plane was a DC-10, the
> airforce uses 707's to refuel (and some smaller planes).
> 4) Escape sequence. If I understood it correctly, the plane that
> rescued the people on AF1 was full of commandoes ready to storm one of the
> airports in Khazakstan. I'll just assume that they had the equipment and
> personel to perform the daring rescue. But here's my question. Instead of
> rappelling into the plane, how come they didn't just parachute, HMMMM.
> 5) Glenn Close as vice-president.
> 6) They never explained how the bad guys got through security.
> 7) I know they said AF1 was bullet-proof, but presumably that was
> from bullets outside the airplane. Noone would plan for bullets to be
> comming from the inside. So all that firing would just ricochet and destroy
> all the cables connecting to the rudder, elevators, aelorons, etc.
> 8) Escape sequence II. That door that they opened to set up the
> cool cable escape WONT open in flight. They're constructed so its
> impossible, otherwise, some dumbass passenger could just go and open them --
> think about it.
> The technical critique being accomplished, I know feel it necessary
> to list the stolen special effects.
> The Living DayLights -- Fight on parajump platform
> Airport 76(?) -- Repelling into the airplane
> Escape from New York -- Presidential Escape Pod
> Cliffhanger -- Repelling out of the airplane.
> Passenger 57 -- two many to count.
> That's just a partial list, feel free to add to it and especially to amend it
So, I'm sorting through my junk in preparation for having my house
cleaned this Thursday and I come across a sheet of paper with 5 names on
it and nothing else. The 5 names are (in order in case that proves
significant): Courtney Love, John Huston, Adolf Hitler, Moses, Isiaih
Rider. I'd love to know the train of thought that produced this list,
but it completely escapes me.
-- John Dobbin