There's some discussion about this being fake. I don't care.
What the hell is wrong with you morons who made this?
[Via Skip]
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
Trained Professionals
There's some discussion about this being fake. I don't care.
What the hell is wrong with you morons who made this?
[Via Skip]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
It was faked! They show you how they did it in an additional video.
A shot on a safely empty range, a firecracker in the watermelon on his head exploding it filmed later and inserted digitally. Still incredibly stupid and pointless.
I bet it'll show up in testimony somewhere. Just what we need.
Here's how they did it. It IS fake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6YVPVbpHXo
Explain why you "don't care" if it's fake.
It's effectively a movie. I doubt you'd be up in arms over some people doing stupid things with guns in a movie.
Let people be rational and responsible. It is no one's fault but the guy who pulled the trigger if someone tries to replicate this by actually shooting the watermelon.
Not only is it fake, but the guy who produced it has a video on how he made it. He does a lot of videos on special effects and cinematography.
Here is the behind the scenes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6YVPVbpHXo&feature=player_profilepage
Freddie Wong is the Youtube guru for gun-effect videos.
When you get down to it, *all* his videos show people shooting people, albeit more creatively than Michael Bay.
The harm is that he doesn't make it exceedingly clear to a newbie watcher that it's a fake, even though he hints at it at the beginning of the vid, plus explains it all in his "how-to" follow up vid.
It IS fake and they link to another video on how they did it.
"I doubt you'd be up in arms over some people doing stupid things with guns in a movie."
Care to make a wager?
In the .wmv movie originally sent around via email there was no such caveat explaining that this was a sick stunt. The original via email led viewers to believe that this actually happened as shown. Now we'll have some backyard commandos going out and trying it just to prove their manhood. As noted herein, we already have the ignorant keyboard commandos trying to justify it as a movie stunt. One reason it doesn't matter that is was fake is because millions have probably already viewed the email version, titled "Braveor 1.wmv" that was sent around. Those viewers have been duped and led to believe it was real. A friend of mine wrote me, "THE JERKS TRYING TO GET RID OF OUR PERSONAL FIREARMS COULD USE THESE FOOLS AS JUSTIFICATION". I totally agree with him, with David, and with Defender above. The fact that it is fake and just a movie stunt doesn't hold water because a version was released that showed it as an actual, creditable event as to what gun owners do with their firearms. ANYONE who condones or justifies that type of conduct is a fool...
"Care to make a wager?"
What goes on in someone's head isn't a smart thing to bet about. Of course I don't care to make a wager.
The question is really, should you be upset about people using special effects to create reckless situations?
If you are upset, whatever. Your blog. It's not a reasonable way of looking at things, but it's a way.
If you're afraid that someone with access to firearms will try to replicate this, it definitely isn't the fault of the YouTube guy. Like I said, the guy behind the trigger is responsible for every bullet he sends downrange. It's not on the YT guy if some moron with a .50 kills a man.
All of Freddie's videos are innovative, entertaining, creative and extremely well-produced. He and his team are head and shoulders above the dreck that usually appears on youTube. His "behind the scenes" videos make it obvious that the videos are contrived. He is laying the groundwork for a future generation of movie special effects artists.
Not a durn thing particularly interesting nor innovative about that video. Now, were Granny Clampett to have been the shooter, it would at least be humorous.
Post a Comment