MovieChat Forums > Blue Ruin (2014) Discussion > The sound of the gunshot got there befor...

The sound of the gunshot got there before the bullet did?


They got this backwards. Watch Quigley Down Under (1990) to see how it is supposed to be done. A typical centerfire rifle cartridge bullet is supersonic, 2 to 3 times faster than the speed of sound, which means it reaches its target before the sound does.

If the scene had been from the perspective of the shooter, then it would have been correct to hear the sound first and then see the bullet hit, but the scene took place at the target.

This is on top of the fact that he wasn't even remotely far enough away for there to have been a noticeable delay between the bullet's arrival and the sound. There was a 5-second delay in there (even though they got it backwards), which would indicate a distance of about a mile away, for a typical medium bore centerfire rifle cartridge bullet (not that he actually would have had a snowball's chance in hell of making that shot at such a distance, especially with iron sights and surplus ammo). But then, immediately after the bullet hit its target, we see that he's very much within earshot and walks to the target in a matter of about 15 seconds, which means he was only ~25 yards away.

Edit: Partially solved; see posts below.

I don't dance, tell jokes or wear my pants too tight, but I do know about a thousand songs.

reply

Thank you for the ballistics lesson. I was thinking the same thing but wasn't sure.

reply

You might be right about the distance and the time between the two, but I do think they did it right.

I saw it like this, all from the perspective of the two guys:

1. We hear a whiz whizzing by. that's the "local" whizzing we are hearing of the bullet by our ears.
2. A few seconds later, we hear the report from the rifle reaching us.
3. then, we see the second shot (whoa). we also hear the report a second later.

To me, that's what I would expect. and from your post, you are saying that too, that "the bullet reaches before the sound does".

reply

I saw it like this, all from the perspective of the two guys:

1. We hear a whiz whizzing by. that's the "local" whizzing we are hearing of the bullet by our ears.
2. A few seconds later, we hear the report from the rifle reaching us.
3. then, we see the second shot (whoa). we also hear the report a second later.

Okay, I watched it again, and you're right, there were two shots fired (the first one missed). I was thinking there was only one shot fired, so I mistook the sound of the first shot that missed for the sound of the second shot that hit, which made it seem like the sound was getting there 5 seconds before the bullet.

So they did get it right (the sound of the shots came about a second after the bullets), but that is right only if the shooter was ~500 yards away. But, since he walked to the target in ~15 seconds, that means he was only ~25 yards away, and there would be no perceptible delay at that range between the bullet and the sound. Time of flight for the bullet would be ~0.03 seconds, and the sound would take 0.07 seconds to get there.

Also, a headshot at ~500 yards with a surplus Mosin-Nagant, stock iron sights, and surplus ammo is almost a miracle, even if you have two tries.

I don't dance, tell jokes or wear my pants too tight, but I do know about a thousand songs.

reply

I think I'm with you on that one. When we see the guy coming out of the woods, as if we have the POV of Dwight, he does seem pretty close. so yeah, i think the time is off. I looked it up, and sound travels at 330 meters (~1000 feet) per second. That seems farther than where we saw the guy come out of the tree line.

I am not going to rewatch to count seconds. There are too many more movies to watch... And i don't know much about headshots, I have never taken one. Not yet...

But I will say this. Very cool scene, very effective with the timing of it all, in general, where we (and the dude who got shot), are like, "what the F was that", and then it gets a little clearer to us what is going on ("oh it's a gun shot..."), and then the next thing we see is a lost jaw bone.

It was effective movie making, no matter how fast sound travels in a sec. I hope the director makes more.

reply

I think I'm with you on that one. When we see the guy coming out of the woods, as if we have the POV of Dwight, he does seem pretty close. so yeah, i think the time is off. I looked it up, and sound travels at 330 meters (~1000 feet) per second. That seems farther than where we saw the guy come out of the tree line.
Yes, sound travels at a little over 1,000 FPS, but a 1 second delay between the bullet's and sound's arrival isn't as simple as that. At ~1,000 feet (~333 yards), the time of flight of the bullet is about a half second, and the sound takes a second to get there, so there would only be about a half second delay.

In fact, now that I think about it some more, a roughly half second delay is the most you'll ever have with the rifle he was using. By the time you get out to say, 1,000 yards, the sound has pretty much caught up with the bullet, because by that time, the bullet has slowed from its initial muzzle velocity of ~2,600 FPS to ~650 FPS, and the speed of sound remains constant here (at 1,000 yards both the bullet and sound will arrive in ~3 seconds).
I am not going to rewatch to count seconds. There are too many more movies to watch... And i don't know much about headshots, I have never taken one. Not yet...
Well, ~350 to ~500 yards away would result in the biggest delay possible with the rifle he was using (about a half second delay), and a human head appears very small to the naked eye when that far away. This is why scopes (telescopic sights) are normally used for accurate long range shooting.
But I will say this. Very cool scene, very effective with the timing of it all, in general, where we (and the dude who got shot), are like, "what the F was that", and then it gets a little clearer to us what is going on ("oh it's a gun shot..."), and then the next thing we see is a lost jaw bone.

It was effective movie making, no matter how fast sound travels in a sec. I hope the director makes more.
It was a good scene, but its unbelievability/contradictions take away from it. It wouldn't have taken much to make the scene believable. Just give him a scoped rifle chambered for something fast, like a .22-250 or .220 Swift (typical long-range varmint cartridges; rifles so-chambered usually have high-powered scopes and heavy barrels, and are very common), and then you'd have your ~1 second delay at ~500 yards, the shot would be believable because the rifle and scope are already set up for such shots at that range on human head-sized or smaller targets (e.g., ground hogs), and after he fired the shots, have him drive to the scene in his truck, or on a 4-wheeler, or whatever, so that the right amount of distance is indicated.

As it stands, he walked to the scene in 15 to 20 seconds, and with an average human walking speed of ~3 MPH (4.4 FPS), that only places him ~25 yards away. Not only is that way too close to have a perceptible delay between the bullet's and the sound's arrival, but it also makes him look incompetent, i.e., missing the first shot with a rifle at only ~25 yards.

I don't dance, tell jokes or wear my pants too tight, but I do know about a thousand songs.

reply

Director chiming in here! (pardon me).
You all have it exactly right, but the timing is protracted for dramatic effect. I applaud the expert dissection of the scene, but it was indeed knowingly altered for a more general audience and for narrative timing (aka a cheat).

Cheers, and thanks for watching!

JS

reply

You are Jeremy Saulnier? Well done. I enjoyed the film. It had realism that made the viewer feel like he was in the middle of all events. Doesn't happen in Bruce Willis/Rock/Vin Diesel movies.

I grew up in South-West Virginia. Speaking of guns, my best friend was Wayne LaPierre (CEO of the National Rifle Association). The last time he said something that was not a lie was prolly 1976. He said he hated gun nuts----like the ending of Easy Rider. He admired the Chicago Eight, lied his way out of Nam, and lies about where he went to college. For example, Siena does not have an Education major, you just study what you want and get a certificate. And Boston College's graduate school is difficult to get into and does not have a degree called "Government".

reply

Awesome !

And I'm glad to see I read that scene right. :-)

Solid movie, dude.


When I'm gone I would like something to be named after me. A psychiatric disorder, for example.

reply

It was nice to see someone make the effort to get it the right way around for a change, I was instantly impressed. You don't see it too often.

Little things like that are the polish that a lot of movies badly need, and demonstrate pride in the work.

And also an effort not to insult the audience.

...then whoa, differences...

reply

Also, a headshot at ~500 yards with a surplus Mosin-Nagant, stock iron sights, and surplus ammo is almost a miracle, even if you have two tries.
Yeah, not to mention he was already on his feet by the time we see him, which indicated he took the shot standing up. I thought we were going to see him with some long range weaponry and a tripod. Nope

You'd feel cocky too if you were full of myself.

reply

he took two shots, tho. the first one misses. then you hear the shot. he looks around, and then get's hit by the second shot. your didn't hear the first shot whiz past. listen again. i agree with your second point, tho.

reply

he took two shots, tho. the first one misses. then you hear the shot. he looks around, and then get's hit by the second shot. your didn't hear the first shot whiz past. listen again.
I know; see here:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2359024/board/nest/232139883?d=232146712#2 32146712

That's why I added ...
Edit: Partially solved; see posts below.

... to the OP.

I don't dance, tell jokes or wear my pants too tight, but I do know about a thousand songs.

reply

Jesus, it was obvious. He even said that it made it legal to kill him because he took aim and he only aimed BECAUSE he fired at him and missed, he only aimed because he heard the first shot. Come on.

reply

Here's another Monday morning backseat driver chiming in! To me the scene should have gone thusly:

Teddy aims down at Dwight. He talks about shooting him in the gut and is cut off mid-sentence as his jaw disappears. Dwight lies stunned, Ben emerges from the woods calling out....

reply

[deleted]

Incorrect on many levels.

1. The bullet arrives first, you hear the shot buzz by first. There are two shots. You missed the first. But you already was informed about this.
Depending on the ballistics, it's also possible that the sound will catch up with the bullet when it drops down to subsonic speeds depending on how far the shot is.

2. There is not 5 seconds between the hit and the bang. It's merely half a second if even that.

3. A bullet takes over the speed of sound merely after a meter so after it left the gun barrel. Read up here.
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1dmidq/if_someone_shoots_at_you_how_far_do_you_have_to/

Although all of this is moot since it's a movie and you must give SOME artistic licence. It would have been one thing if we heard the crack first and then the bullet hit, then you would have had a legitimate complaint. But it didn't so you haven't. As it is now you are just nitpicking a cool scene to death just because you didn't pay attention in the first place.

Go home and get your *beep* shine box

reply

Incorrect on many levels.
No. Incorrect on exactly 1 level (there were 2 shots instead of 1), which I've already noted. The scene was still wrong, as the director has already admitted to.
1. The bullet arrives first, you hear the shot buzz by first. There are two shots. You missed the first. But you already was informed about this.
So why are you pointing it out?
Depending on the ballistics, it's also possible that the sound will catch up with the bullet when it drops down to subsonic speeds depending on how far the shot is.
If you'd actually read all the posts in this thread, you'd see that this bit of "info" is utterly redundant. I've already discussed this, and in a lot more detail. Either way, he was only ~25 yards away, thus there shouldn't have been any perceptible delay at all.
2. There is not 5 seconds between the hit and the bang. It's merely half a second if even that.
Thank you Captain Obvious, but I already know that, obviously. I'll go ahead and repeat myself:

"Okay, I watched it again, and you're right, there were two shots fired (the first one missed). I was thinking there was only one shot fired, so I mistook the sound of the first shot that missed for the sound of the second shot that hit, which made it seem like the sound was getting there 5 seconds before the bullet.

So they did get it right (the sound of the shots came about a second after the bullets), but that is right only if the shooter was ~500 yards away.
But, since he walked to the target in ~15 seconds, that means he was only ~25 yards away, and there would be no perceptible delay at that range between the bullet and the sound. Time of flight for the bullet would be ~0.03 seconds, and the sound would take 0.07 seconds to get there."


Does the bolding help?
3. A bullet takes over the speed of sound merely after a meter so after it left the gun barrel. Read up here.
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1dmidq/if_someone_shoots_at_you_how_far_do_you_have_to/
Again, thank you, Captain Obvious, but this is utterly irrelevant to the scene. See above.
Although all of this is moot since it's a movie and you must give SOME artistic licence. It would have been one thing if we heard the crack first and then the bullet hit, then you would have had a legitimate complaint. But it didn't so you haven't. As it is now you are just nitpicking a cool scene to death just because you didn't pay attention in the first place.
Comical irony coming from someone who clearly didn't pay attention (or understand) the posts I've already made. And again, the scene was still wrong, i.e., there shouldn't have been a perceptible delay at that range between the bullet and the sound. So yes, I do have a legitimate complaint, and the director has already confirmed that they did it strictly for the effect, even though it was wrong (which you would already know if you could read properly).

I don't dance, tell jokes or wear my pants too tight, but I do know about a thousand songs.

reply

Overly long and defensive post from you, when you in fact were, incorrect on many levels, because you didn't pay attention.

Go home and get your *beep* shine box

reply

Are you really going to sit there and tell us that the grown-up adults who made this movie think the sound of a bullet travels faster than the bullet itself?

Really?

It is instantly obvious that two shots were fired, the first one just whizzed past.


"I can't help but notice that there are skulls all over everything. Are we the baddies?"

reply

Dang, a lot of folks here who can't seem to grasp the concept of reading the variety of replies between your OP and their knee jerk response.

...then whoa, differences...

reply