Hollywood physics, which ones favour physics? Or should we go with the Hollywood flow?

Question

You know when someone has a plan to blow up gas barrels s/he shoots it and it explodes as they had planned.

But when they want to trigger an explosion later they shoot it same as before the flammable liquid comes spilling out and they later flick a match or cigarette but on the ground and sit back and watch it explodes where in real life like when it was tested in mythbusters it wouldnt work it

I know thats just how it works in Hollywood land its just entertainment not to be philisophically thought about or justified.

... but things like this leave me confused to how these situations would pan out in real life...like if I were to shoot a petrol truck right in the tank would it explode or begin to spill.

What other loop holes like this have you noticed?
Should they be remedied so they're hyper realistic like the Bourne Identity (where he does shoot a gas tank and it does explodes so I do trust the filmakers that this would really happen because its set in a realistic worl

Answer 1

Another example I've noticed is elevators. In Hollywood, elevators are suspended by a single cable with no safety systems. When the single, pathetic cable breaks, the elevator falls, and the occupants plunge down the shaft while the hero barely escapes.

In real life, and depending upon capacity of course, elevators will have up to 7 cables for passenger elevators. In the event all 7 cables are somehow cut, there is a mechanical safety system that will clamp onto the rails and halt descent. And in the event this is disabled, shock absorbers are placed in the elevator pit to help cushion the impact. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, elevators are designed with very high safety factors; in other words, they are over-designed to prevent catastrophic failure. But naturally, all these safety factors don't make a very exciting elevator sequence in Hollywood.

Answer 2

Hyper-realism? I am afraid you need to continue raising the bar as the other people said gas tanks dont explode when you shoot them, sure they'd leak if there was liquid at that level but even then flicking a cigarette in to the pool of petrol would not normally light it!

I think I know the perfect website for you - one of the movies they talk about (in terms of accuracy of the physics in it) is Bourne Identity - http://science.howstuffworks.com/framed.htm?parent=sci-fi.htm&url=http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/

Answer 3

Myth Busters tried to blow up a petrol/gas tank by shooting it using a high powered rifle. No matter how often they shot the tank it wouldn't explode. Just leaked like a sieve.

Answer 4

Mythbusters on the Discovery Channel tried shooting gas tanks. They don't explode. They did manage to get one to catch fire by using phosphorous tracer rounds, but it was pathetic.

When a lead round goes through the steel of a gas tank, it doesn't create a spark, so the petrol leaks out.

Answer 5

If Spiderman followed real physics he wouldn't be able to reach the tops of buildings in just four swings. It takes an huge amount of energy to gain that height. Just think how tired you'd get climbing 40 floors then think how he can climb 10 floors at a time with just a tug on the thread.

Answer 6

I concur with all of the above answers, but recommend this site -

http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/

it's an excellent source of both good and bad examples!