Thread 64145785

In the movie "Reign of Fire", dragons somehow managed to defeat modern human armies. How could some dragons defeat modern SPAAGs, IADS and air forces?

>>64145785 (OP)
because its a shit movie

I could see a dragon being a terror in medieval times but modern times? Or even just semi-modern times? Lol. As soon as the 40mm bofors was invented it was over for any hypothetical dragons.

>>64145789
>>64145785 (OP)
If Dragon scales were so strong that they could take 30mm-40mm and shrapnel. It might be possible, since modern air defenses are meant to take out aircraft literally made of "plastic"

>>64145795
Javelins can track and shoot down helicopters. Eventually you'll have MANPADS with EFP warheads if the war drags on long enough.

If they come out of the ground or suddently.
I can see why people wouldnt be able to coordinate the heavy equipment soon enough.
Same if there are a lot of them. like a lot.

>>64145785 (OP)
Why don't you watch the movie, faggot?
There's literally an entire column of cowboys taken out by one single dragon.

That said, it's a science fiction movie, stop thinking too hard, it's unbecoming.

>>64145785 (OP)
If I am remembering it right they are like cockroaches were they had swarms of them all around the world in a year or so. Together with them eating ash and burning everything they see you get a total collapse of society in a handful of months.
They killed of the dinosaurs in the movie and then hybernated for a couple million years.

>>64145785 (OP)
Because Harry Potter fucked your mom.
Stupid bullshit off topic threads

>>64145817
But by that point the dragons would've achieved air superiority already

>>64145795
ok, then load 30mm AP instead.

>>64145785 (OP)
Take this shit to /tv/ together with your WH40k threads.

Depends on the dragon.
Depends on how many there are.
Depends on how tough they are.
What army gets to respond first?
Modern, as in WW2 modern, cold war modern or modern as in immediately right now?
Are there pro-dragon scalies in each government delaying the response?
So many variables that can't be defined because it's a fantasy creature that varies in capacities between settings.
Also the movie was mid and not worth talking about.
tl;dr Shit thread.

>>64145785 (OP)
I remember that piece of shit movie. What a stinker

I thought it was okayish; it's a popcorn flick for sure, then again I like dragons and unfortunately beggars have to be choosers when it comes to good dragon related media, especially film/tv.
>keeping it /k/ related
IIRC a lot of the collapse of society in the film was caused by governments having the bright idea to nuke themselves to kill the dergs, which went about as well as expected. The dergs in this film are non-magical (big lizzers with hypergolic saliva type) so they aren't equipped with RWR so any kind of radar guided missile will eat their lunch. The whole thing kicks off in London so I could definitely see them wreaking havoc in Bongland for a bit until the RAF (and USAF stationed in the UK, probably a bit of help from Adl'A from Fance) could get organized.

>>64145785 (OP)
They could collapse society by taking out political leadership, key infrastructure and leave the military without any cohesion or preparation for what's going on.
Doesn't matter much if the military can fight them, when society is half-gone and the cities are starving.

Because military hardwares are still manned by meatbags. In the movie the dragons swarm out like angry hornets and intantly burn all organic (they eat the ash)

>>64145785 (OP)
There were a lot of dragons

>>64145785 (OP)
>How could some dragons defeat modern SPAAGs
It would defeat pantsir by not getting fired upon at all.

>>64145939
I liked the movie too, it was fun and well-acted
it's crazy how many movies Christian Bale did that was kinda retarded and yet just FUN
I'd take it over any Hollywoke summer blockbuster of the last 5 years

>picrel
lol

>>64145795
Aircraft are made of aluminum.

>>64145789
>over for any hypothetical dragons

Lord Toruk says hi.

>>64146150
Which is the plastic of metals.

>>64145817
>drags on
teehee

Like others have said it was strongly indicated that there was a swarm of them, enough to consume the biomass of a mass extinction event. And they're pretty resistant to damage while being attracted and actively fed by explosions.

I suppose your best bet would be biological and chemical weapons but it's complicated by them setting fire to everything and reptile immunology is poorly understood.

>>64145939
>1754331202848918.jpg

The Eastern/Amerindian man submits and pays tribute to the dragon as a natural part of the ecosystem.
The Western/Near-East man doesn't put up with that shit and views the natural order as man's dominion.

Why is there such a sharp divide between the two? You see it in creation myths too like how the Amerindian equivalents of Adam and Eve get help from the Gods and nature.

>this movie had Matthew McConaughey in it
>this move had Christian Bale in it
>this movie had Gerard Butler in it
>tfw literally never heard of it until now
wtf?

>>64146248
lots of lower-budget, non-blockbuster films go under the radar
ever since I decided around 2017 not to watch any movie with black female leads or trannys in it, I've had no shortage of material whatsoever

>>64145785 (OP)
Its a pretty decent movie for back in the day, not every production needs to push boundaries and redefine the world of cinema. the axe jump scene was fucking epic and I dont care.
Also nice to see that Matthew McConaughey has the acting range to play a badass instead a crying moapman.
Everything else is just movie magic bullshit where some organic meatbag can magically stop modern munitions.
10/10 never ever make a remake of that movie hollywood.

>>64146269
>lower-budge
60 mil was a decent chunk of change for 2002. I Robot was like a 120.

>>64145785 (OP)
They wouldn't, it's a movie.
>>64145788
>>64145909
We're allowing bots now? Get these subhumans outta here.
>>64146288
Aye, it was a great childhood movie, the Xbox game was decent too.

Dragons are generally magical beings even if they appear to be purely biological.

>>64146308
let's look at the budgets of 2002's top grossers
>Spider Man: 139 mil
>Star Wars AOTC: 115 mil
>HP COS: 100 mil
>LOTR 2 Towers: 94 mil
>Goldmember: 63 mil
>MIB 2: 140 mil
>Ice Age: 59 mil
>Beautiful Mind: 58 mil
>Scooby Doo: 84 mil
>Die Another Day: 142 mil
>Lilo & Stitch: 80 mil
>XXX: 70 mil
>Minority Report: 102 mil
>Bourne Identity: 60 mil
>8 Mile: 40 mil
>Black Hawk Down: 92 mil

you're right, 60 mil was a decent chunk, but at the same time as you can see from the array of 2002 films above, you can't scrimp much. look at 8 Mile for example, it's not a big effects movie. which is why I said "lower budget"; it's not cheap, that's for sure, but not exactly top dollar either

>>64145785 (OP)
i only really remember the scene where they act out star wars for the kids.

Get out of my fucking head, I was just thinking about how to fix this movie while I was brushing my teeth.

>>64146288
It could never be remade to have the same gritty feel in ZOGwood today but there's huge issues with the film. It's a bad movie made well. Theres no tension and every character is a cardboard cutout. It was just cool seeing dragons as an 8 year old breathe fire.

>>64146433
never underestimate Hollywood's greed to squeeze out just a couple more bucks from the nostalgia lemon.
I absolutely dread the day they get their greedy hands on a master piece like Master and Commander,

>>64145851
Thanx for the bump

>>64146455
we'll just memoryhole it like we do Gladiator 2

>>64146433
>how to fix this movie
there's nothing wrong with it dramatically other than /k/autism
Christian Bale has a choice: throw the dice or don't. simple as.

the way to fix it /k/wise is to Madmax it up and put it more explicitly that nukes wiped out most of the dragons and ourselves, and this is the last breeding pair that remains, but also the last of humanity that remains.

>>64145785 (OP)
They can't.

>>64145785 (OP)
Plot armor

>>64146475
If you're leaning into it as a corny b-movie from the 2000s, sure. Objectively though it's incredibly bland, probably why it flopped.
That last scene for instance has Bale just running around buildings until he just shoots the damn dragon in the mouth. Mcconauhey chewed up the scenery as a loud American, which was great, and then jumps into a dragons jaws for no reason

>>64145785 (OP)
The only thing that makes sense in the context of the movie is if there were like billions of the fucking things. They can apparently eat ash and carbon raw and I don't think they shit, maybe they're some kind of absurd super magic efficient swarm creature.

If ten million flying elephants puking thousands of gallons of napalm appeared out from under the world's 100 biggest cities the entire global economy would shit itself and billions would die just from starvation (good!) let alone the actual monsters.

>>64146553
Reminder GATE is incredibly gay and the JSDF would get smoked in most fantasy worlds.

>>64146243
APFSDS doesn't make an explosion and would have great effect on a big bag of flesh in the sky.

By offering offering the airmen sex

>>64149883
now that's Eglinposting

>>64146288
>the axe jump scene was fucking epic and I dont care.
it would have been even more epic had he survived and not died like a chump.

>>64149961
Sometimes there's no way to live. All you can do is die well.

>>64145864
Shut the fuck up, tourist. 40K is gay though.

>>64145785 (OP)
>>64145789
>>64145795
>>64145845
>>64145874
They aren't dragons, they are wyverns.

>>64150058
heraldryfags go and stay go

>>64150090
Sir, please repeat yourself in a way that people of literary means can understand you.

>>64150100
oh, gone too deep for Mr Literary Smartypants now eh?

the wyvern-dragon distinction only matters to people interested in medieval heraldry, because the distinction only arose as a way to differentiate between heraldic wyverns and heraldic dragons. you might as well point at picrel and say "uhm ackshually that's a leopard". makes the same amount of sense.

>>64150112
I was asking more about the "Stay and stay go" bit. Dragons have four limbs and two wings, wyverns have their front limbs as wings. So... Ya, not talking about dragons and wyverns here... Just "Go and stay go." what does that mean? 'cause in English, it's gibberish

>>64150119
>Dragons have four limbs and two wings, wyverns have their front limbs as wings
see again:
>only matters to people interested in medieval heraldry

>Go and stay go." what does that mean?
lurk moar

>>64149961
or if the dragon just ignored him completely, letting him fall like some Wile E coyote sketch.

>>64150112
>Historic distinction exists
>Uses purposeful misidentification as failed analogy
You are not very bright, anon.

>>64145785 (OP)
Aren't dragons supposed to be intelligent beings with centuries of experience? They aren't going to be charging at a gun-line like a retarded animal, they'd use their traits to set up traps and plot how to most efficiently take out their enemies' leadership using the fact they are fast, flying, fire-breathing lizards that can level a large building in seconds.

>>64150184
>Historic distinction exists
>the distinction only arose as a way to differentiate between heraldic wyverns and heraldic dragons

>>64146553
>>64148838
It's incredible how there were no more chink cartoons like GATE made. I would think it'd be a pretty popular genre.

>>64150386
Military, [insert technical field] fiction requires a degree of research most authors would never bother with.
Same reason why most authors of it have backgrounds in or at least adjacent in what they're writing about.

Same reason why while I'm writing my Lovecraft meets Glowies meets Japanese High School I can write about combat, mil antics, weapons and the broad strokes of school life easy, but I gotta spend half a day reading up on the specifics of the Japanese school system, streaming culture, ballet, methane hydrates, etc etc etc.

>>64145850
It was this. They breed like crazy and like a million of them emerged all at once.

>>64150321
>Distinction by genuine academics regarding imaginary animals means the distinction doesn't exist.

>>64150804
>heraldry
>genuine academics
look! a leopard!

>>64150788
I guess I'm just still living in 2012 when GuP was insanely popular. There was a lot more military anime in general back then.

>>64146394
Damn, what happened with Hollywood? I could say many of them were genuinely great, Black Hawk Down alone is quite /k/ good.

>>64148838
Your tears are delicious fantasyfag.

>>64150830
It's more of a manga thing. All the military autists are found there. GATE was novel more just for being animated. /k/ scans does loads of neat military manga.

>>64150852
>what happened
liberals

regardless of what his current reputation is, Critical Drinker has a good series titled "Why Modern Movies Suck" which explains with basic and timeless principles of fiction why

TL;DR when you try to force a set of morally-bankrupt political beliefs instead of the truth, it will always feel faked and unnatural. e.g. when heroes act like children and the movie tries to depict this as "brave", or when the villains are easily defeated at every step and the movie tries to pretend that they pose a threat, etc

>>64150871
>It's more of a manga thing. All the military autists are found there.
Yeah but still I'd want something animated, especially if it's done at least as well as GATE was.

>>64150816
Not a rebuttal.

>>64145785 (OP)
>In the movie "Reign of Fire", dragons somehow managed to defeat modern human armies. How could some dragons defeat modern SPAAGs, IADS and air forces?
Have not seen it, but if dragons are just big animals then at the best it might be able to do are mobility kills, or if firebreathing cook up some ammo.
Magical dragons however are classically described as being able to melt practically anything with their breath, shapeshift, move in extreme speeds, and even turn invisible, on top of being extremely intelligent and with sharp senses. This would allow them to utilize hit-and-run tactics without modern weaponry able to do much about it.

>>64150906
certainly, if you don't know it

>>64150875
This attitude of "Modern movies suck" is only really true for mainstream Hollywood and similar mass-consumption slop.
There are still a lot of good, even great movies coming out all the time.

If anything, you have to reach even further than the Oughts-70's to find the true gems of the film canon.

>>64145785 (OP)
>Americans come up with a goofy sky diving technique to hunt the dragons rather than actual militarly tactics
>The sky diving technique is never actually effective on screen. Even via rule of cool movie logic
Honestly this more than anything is what rates Reign of Fire as a massively lame movie in my book.

Anyway. The Dragons would probably need some really over the top high fantasy or mythological level magic or some shit like that. If they're just flying dinosaurs that breathe fire there's just way too much modern weaponry that could kill them from long range. They'd need to reproduce faster than you could build anti-air missiles or triple A artillery shells, or arrive in such overwhelming initial numbers they could swarm over industrialized nation states.

>>64150945
>This attitude of "Modern movies suck" is only really true for mainstream Hollywood and similar mass-consumption slop
well, for me it is important to analyse exactly why it is so

the latest-dated movies that really knocked it out of the park for me were Blade Runner 2049, and Gifted, both in 2017
the latter has a $7m budget, it's one of those Hallmark-type dramas which cast and crew basically do for the heck of it
oh yeah and I did watch Avengers Endgame just for the closure, but felt it disappointing compared to Infinity War
it's impossible for me to sit through anything else in the past 8 years

>If anything, you have to reach even further than the Oughts-70's to find the true gems of the film canon
recently I somewhat enjoyed Monte Walsh, although the climactic shootout was badly acted
Jeanne Moreau was crazy hot for 42

>>64146150
wrong
>>64146188
wrong

>>64150979
Well, that high fantasy bullshit isn't really that far from what people believed in the past.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation

Earth dragons would spawn from the earth
Fire dragons from lava lakes.
Sky dragons from air.
etc.

>>64148764
I think it was stated the dragons did less damage than the humans attempting to nuke them off the face of the Earth

>>64145785 (OP)
Monster movies are always shit because you basically need magic to defeat modern weaponry. Discount all of our armor and big guns, dragon scales and whatever other monster wankery protects them would have to be really tough and heavy just to shrug off 5.56 fire like they do in movies, enough so that it would never be able to fly or it’s skin would be so rigid that it could barely move. Elephant guns are only as powerful as they are for a clean, ethical kill, but it’s not like 5.56 won’t kill an elephant when you hose it down with an M4.

>>64145855
So the dragons can fly at mach 5 and above 50,000 feet? By flapping their wings? How is that supposed to work?

>>64150058
And wyverns are a type of dragon.

>>64150119
Some of the earliest descriptions of dragons in European folklore describe them no wings at all and they are more snake like.

>>64151183
>inb4 ackshually that's an amphithere

>>64151198
>clearly a lundwyrm, not a dragon

>>64151204
>lundwyrm
not if it has legs

>>64151204
meant to say
>lundwyrm
>only if it has legs
two, to be precise

>>64150921
Fail. Your argument is inherently flawed. You are taking the stance that all big cats are lions, or should just be referred to as cats.
I am arguing that an actual leopard is not a lion and is in fact a leopard.

>>64151253
To be precise, you are
>arguing that an actual leopard is not a lion and is in fact a leopard
while claiming that it's a
>>64150804
>Distinction by genuine academics
That is why you fail.

I posted a picture of a heraldic leopard, you were too uninformed to understand.

>>64151049
That's honestly the kind of shit more fantasy/modern crossovers should emphasize. Writers wanting to coach the vanilla fantasy rpg stuff as having an easily understandable scientific explanation behind it has the unintended problem that it ussually establishes the fantasy stuff as being mundane enough that it really should be straight forward to just machine gun or shell it to death.

Dragons (or other weird as monsters) just sometimes popping fully formed out of the ground would be a initially super counter intuitive threat to modern soldiers convinced there always had to be a nest to track down.

>>64151409
yes, the
>magic is only ascended science
problem is well-known, see: MCU Dr Strange for example
nobody cares however, especially because most readers are atheists who much prefer a scientific explanation rather than Because Magic

>>64145845
>libtard/jew writers don't understand anything about war and have outright contempt for it and its enthusiasts
>just let it go bro
How about: fuck you.

>>64150857
Gate is literally just pissing and shitting and crying because fantasy always wins lol

>>64145785 (OP)
some questions first, are the dragons intelligent? can they use magic? do they polymorph?

>>64150058
>>64150090
>>64150100
>>64150112
>>64150119
>>64150184
>>64150321
Treating the difference in dragon design like a technicality of exact wording is itself a smokescreen for the real issue: dragons without grasping front limbs are objectively inferior and the people who push them are all gay retards.

Wyvern Vs Dragon was just a convenient way to denote
Shitty gay chicken bat dragon who's pathetic vs awesome looking regal final evolution of the symbolic archetypal Chimera.

Proponents of the armless design are almost exclusively atheist nerds who resent the magical symbolism of the proper, cooler dragon, and want desperately to demystify the dragon by turning it into a big crawling alien Bat. The fact that game of thrones pushes the niggerdragon should be enough for anyone with pattern recognition: bad people like wyverns.

>>64152652
ok

>>64152652
a profound and eloquently-stated theory
what about lindworms then?

>>64152652
>what is a wyrm

>>64152652
What a stupid opinion, were you dropped on the head as a child?

>>64152753
He's got a semblence of a point, a Trve Dragon is somewhat magical, if only for the sake of it's 6 functional limbs.

>>64145785 (OP)
because they're magical nigga

>>64152753
>Seething
Not an opinion, objective fact and pattern recognition.
Chicken bat lizards are worse objectively and denote their proponents as morally inferior.

>>64152920
You will never be a dragon.

>>64152764
Wrong, it should have 5 functional limbs

>>64152952
That's not what your mom said post BadDragon prosthetic

>>64146394
>LOTR 2 towers
>movie that literally set the bar for every single aspect of the film industry
>94 mil
>Scooby-Doo
>the biggest cultural impact is probably causing my lifelong nerdy girl fetish
>84 mil

How the fuck

>>64145785 (OP)
Dragons are spellcasters.
"Protection from Normal Weapons" is a low-level spell.
Unless you have combat wizards or battle-clerics, who can enchant weapons or strike directly, you're going to lose.
Also: Dragons, green dragons in particular, are very intelligent master manipulators. The "modern" "Air Force" is run by literal retards and wannabe politicians. A supergenius dragon could easily defeat them without firing a shot, just by speaking to them in their dreams and turning them into thralls.

>>64152957
and consummate v's

>>64152967
NZ dollars; passion project; next to no pay for most of the cast except for Ian fucking McKellen, which has really changed my opinion of the faggot; cottage industry physical effects; traditional pre-internet marketing campaign; and very limited strategic use of CGI

salary and marketing eats up at least a quarter each of the average film budget nowadays. on this point alone, LOTR2 would have half the cost of a comparable movie today.

>>64145845
>That said, it's a science fiction movie, stop thinking too hard, it's unbecoming.
You're everything wrong with modern culture, you utter faggot.

>>64152920
That looks really fucking gay.
Like D&D levels of gay.

>>64152974
Are you autistic?

>>64153073
>he asked
>on this website

>>64153073
yes

>>64145785 (OP)
How quickly do you think an army can get ready to respond to a bunch of dragons appearing out of nowhere right now?
Imagine if you will, that right at this moment, about 20 dragons start wrecking havoc in downtown London or Chicago or Paris or whichever city in a developed country. Or just London for example. 20 fire-breating dragons, about same size as in that picture you posted. Tell me, what would be the response on the other side of the phone should you alert them that there is a flying firebreathing creature eating people and torching everything around?

Now think about how fast those dragons move, their movements/agility, reflex, the fact that they can breathe fire, and match that against a jet fighter, apache, or an armoured vehicle. What chance is there for a missile to hit that creature? How much flack ammo does british army have, and how many flack cannons they have? Is flack even effective against a full-grown dragon?

>>64145832
And IIRC, there was a LOT of eggs in that lair.

>>64153128
>Imagine if you will, that right at this moment, about 20 dragons start wrecking havoc in downtown London
London police would see a dragon and go: "Oi mate, do you have a flying license?"

>>64145785 (OP)
The intro to the movie says that the dragons spawned at an incredibly rapid rate, like millions of dragons overnight. 1 million dragons would probably obliterate any military in the world in pretty short order because there just isn't enough ordnance to knock them down fast enough to prevent being overwhelmed, even if one missile = one kill. Planes have to land and if your air base is on fire and the ground crews are eaten by the 990,000 dragons still alive after your 100% successful sortie, you're fucked. Add to that the panic of the general population being eaten by literal dragons making it difficult to organize a response. It's a cheap writing tactic, but if there were legitimately millions of dragons everywhere tomorrow and they bred like rabbits on fertility drugs, then it would probably be a nightmare to deal with.

>>64153069
Lmao the seething just gets deeper

>>64145785 (OP)
> How could some dragons defeat modern SPAAGs, IADS and air forces?
Scalies and vorefags leaking enough intel to tip the scales is highly probable.

>>64146288
What was his plan for after axing the dragon

>>64150912
The film doesn't work because there's a rag tag bunch of ex military dragon slayers that manage okay and Dragons appear to be perfectly susceptible to human weapons. The film just handwaves 'Yeah the dragons destroyed civilisation' with no explanation as to how they took on worlds militaries that are perfectly capable of shooting things out of the sky

>>64150058
that argument was popularized by dnd