MegaGlest Forum

Off topic => Off topic => Topic started by: Darth_Sidion on 6 May 2011, 17:38:31

Title: A possible Misconception
Post by: Darth_Sidion on 6 May 2011, 17:38:31
Okay, I hope this is allowed in this off-topic section. It's regarding the up-coming Pirates 4 film. Recently, I've read an article on Pirates wiki, it says that the Queen Annes Revenge is a frigate. Also, it's labeled as a battleship. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't QAR supposed to be a galleon? Historically, it was such. A large one, but not the biggest type. And then too, the article claims QAR has '70 guns'.

The ship portraying QAR in this new film is The Sunset, which also portrayed The Black Pearl in previous films. The Pearl contained only 30 or so guns, not being able to carry anymore than that. Even so, neither Jack nor Barbossa wanted the addition of more cannons. Basically what I'm trying to say is this: QAR is the same size (roughly) as the Pearl. Also, I counted the gunports on QAR and the spots on the top-deck for the top-deck cannons. It came to around 30-31. 31 if you count this smaller gunport on the stern of the ship, roughly upper-right hand side.

Are other people really that ignorant (forgive that expression) of ship classifications? Or, the ability to count guns themselves?

Please feel free to discuss this and here is the link to said article:

http://pirates.wikia.com/wiki/Queen_Anne%27s_Revenge#cite_note-0
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: John.d.h on 6 May 2011, 18:15:53
I think this sums it up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJFFLvwNLlM
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: Darth_Sidion on 6 May 2011, 21:43:02
That really doesn't answer my questions. Yes, I understand it's a movie, therefore it's subject to being historically inaccurate, but this isn't really a matter of history. I should've stated simply, that the QAR is not a frigate (just look at her build, it's visually obvious), nor is it a battleship (a.k.a ship-of-the-line). You can look right at the mizzen mast, it's not the typical design from most ships-of-the-line of that age and time period.

Aside from this, what is the movie that guy is reffering to?
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: John.d.h on 7 May 2011, 05:25:25
He won't say what movie, because he wants the historical advisor guy to remain anonymous.  It could be just about anything, given how many movies have come out and been terribly historically inaccurate.  Anyway, my point is that the people who make films really don't care about accuracy.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: Mr War on 7 May 2011, 08:31:55
well I agree it's not a frigate or a battleship man. Nice boat though
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: Omega on 7 May 2011, 16:59:59
Quote from: John.d.h on  7 May 2011, 05:25:25
He won't say what movie, because he wants the historical advisor guy to remain anonymous.  It could be just about anything, given how many movies have come out and been terribly historically inaccurate.  Anyway, my point is that the people who make films really don't care about accuracy.

(click to show/hide)
Wow, after fully reading all those articles, I can't deny you are correct. I've lost track of all the discrepancies I've seen in movies from real life. I also recall a physics book (http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/) that explained in depth why most movies would be impossible in real life.
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: Darth_Sidion on 9 May 2011, 21:25:44
I read that briefly, films seem to just break all known laws of physics and sanity. I went back to that wiki article, it still labels QAR as a battleship and a frigate. I think I'll have to edit that info myself.
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: -Archmage- on 9 May 2011, 21:49:05
Quote from: Darth_Sidion on  9 May 2011, 21:25:44
I read that briefly, films seem to just break all known laws of physics and sanity. I went back to that wiki article, it still labels QAR as a battleship and a frigate. I think I'll have to edit that info myself.

Hollywood is Hollywood man. They are professionals at insanity and fiction.
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: Zoythrus on 9 May 2011, 22:56:00
Quote from: Omega on  7 May 2011, 16:59:59
Wow, after fully reading all those articles, I can't deny you are correct. I've lost track of all the discrepancies I've seen in movies from real life. I also recall a physics book (http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/) that explained in depth why most movies would be impossible in real life.
and this is why we have the Mythbusters!
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: Darth_Sidion on 10 May 2011, 19:35:59
wow this topic got a bit broad-spectrumed. but i think i'll just leave that wiki article alone. so many of them having to do with ships are inaccurate in gun count, it's pathetic.
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: Omega on 10 May 2011, 21:50:26
Quote from: Darth_Sidion on 10 May 2011, 19:35:59
wow this topic got a bit broad-spectrumed. but i think i'll just leave that wiki article alone. so many of them having to do with ships are inaccurate in gun count, it's pathetic.
It's pirates of the Caribbean, a Disney movie. What do you expect? :P
Title: Re: A possible Misconception
Post by: Darth_Sidion on 11 May 2011, 15:36:00
I expect that these so-called fans count the dang number of gunports on their so-called favorite ships! I do, I count gunports on ships like it's no-ones business. Here's the simplicity of it:

You count the ports on one side, times that by two which will give you the total count of guns from the port and starboard sides combined. The tricky part is the stern chasers and bow chasers. Not all ships have them, so that could end up as guess work.