Do you guys know how a taser works? In real life, it is nothing like the way a taser is depicted in this movie. In real life, a taser gives people an intense shock. There is no loss of consciousness. In this movie, a taser is portrayed as this device that knocks someone out cold within seconds of contact. That detail alone pretty much invalidates the whole movie. Bruce Willis was right to speak out against this movie. It is complete trash.
shareI have something to add.
It seemed like a advertisement for ciggarettes. Now I have no "vendetta" for smoking in movies, but the amount in this movie was kinda ridculous, It seemed like someone was lighting up every five minutes. Smoing for realism is fine, but smoking as a product placement is another thing.
Now back to what you said, yes the tazer pyschics are pretty screwed-up. The biggest flaw I have seen is at the end when Willis tazer someone while he is soaked, would he had been fired as well. Also, I have never found the tazer to be a every imtimidating weapons in a movie. It can't kill, it only incapaciates, that not really scary. "Sure it does not kill you but it tinglees quite a bit".
Not to mention all of the ridiculous car chases and the most pathetic ending ever. This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen.
haven't you watched cops and seen what the tasers do. they can take down a 300 pound guy that three or four officers can't tackle but yeah willis should've been shocked good also with the currents contact transfer
share[deleted]
Something else noticeable about this movie. After being "fried" by the taser, he sank. Shouldn't he have floated? The only way he would have sank is if something heavy was pulling him down.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I thought it was the Kevlar vest that caused him to sink. Remember, he sank to the bottom two minutes before that. And then he magically came back to life to get stun gunned...
Just my $.02
First of all, no "tasers" were used in this movie. They were "Stun Guns." Two different animals. The serial killer's trademark in this film was the use of a stun gun to disable/abduct a victim before killing them. With a stun gun, you have to be within "striking distance" for it to be effective. Hence, the title.
This from a site regarding tasers versus stun guns:
"One advantage of Tasers is that they can be used as conventional stun guns. A problem, however, is that the electrode wires and gas cartridge must be reloaded each time the user fires. Conventional stun guns are portable and maintain a continuous charge. However, they must be used within striking distance of an attacker."
Taser is a brand, which includes stun guns. Taser like 1,000 other brand names, have become generic for the product. Asp is another example that people think means a specific tool, but Asp too is a brand.
Die Hard 2, same thing Willis' wife knocks out a man in one short zap. I'm willing to bet stupid anti stun gun laws followed fears of this magical knock out device.
Is there a difference between how a stun gun affects someone versus a taser? Or is it the same thing but just a different way of delivering it?
shareDozens of people have been killed with Tasers.
share