Why was the dog going under there in the first place?
[QUOTE=J-DAWG;36072999]Why was the dog going under there in the first place?[/QUOTE]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdQgs9tWTiM[/media]
looks fake as fuck
[QUOTE=Soleeedus;36073028]looks fake as fuck[/QUOTE]
apparently the spraypaint reacted with the stove's pilot light
Seems awfully fake to me...Can't be sure though.
This is why every dog ever should be put down.
[QUOTE=Krinkels;36073189]This is why every dog ever should be put down.[/QUOTE]
But then who will chase cats?
[QUOTE=Krinkels;36073189]This is why every dog ever should be put down.[/QUOTE]
soooo I'm going to assume you're being sarcastic.
forgive me I can't read sarcasm anymore.
honestly if that's fake (which I don't think it is), that's a hell of a lot of effort put into it to make it look real going by that explanation video
that is one dumb corgi.
[QUOTE=Furnost;36073235]honestly if that's fake (which I don't think it is), that's a hell of a lot of effort put into it to make it look real going by that explanation video[/QUOTE]
the fire still seems fake since they dont show it and dont really show it's aftermath. spray paint doesnt seem fake but if the fire is then that's a fucking dick move to do that to the dog
i don't really see how this could be fake...
what else is supposed to happen when a pool consisting of an entire can of flamable spraypaint is less than a foot away from two different pilot lights?
[editline]23rd May 2012[/editline]
and if you think the spraypaint just exploding everywhere is fake then you need yo head checked son
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;36073273]the fire still seems fake since they dont show it and dont really show it's aftermath. spray paint doesnt seem fake but if the fire is then that's a fucking dick move to do that to the dog[/QUOTE]
well I don't think one is going to have it in their mind to make sure to catch the fire on video when they should focus on getting it out first, seeing as how the whole damn area was covered in spray paint
the aftermath is shown in the explanation video at 1:34 I think, it looked like a lot of bits and pieces were burnt by the fire on the kitchen floor
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;36073327]Looks fake to me, specially how they never show the "fire" on the video[/QUOTE]
Because the proper reaction to a fire is to film it.
[QUOTE=Penultimate;36073637]Because the proper reaction to a fire is to film it.[/QUOTE]
well the effects that happen on camera when it "explodes" look so fake
The fire kind of looked after effects-y.
And I'm not sure why someone would fake something like this other than for publicity.
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;36073812]They seemed to film everything else around it, just not directly at the fire. To me it looks like they were consiously trying to not film it[/QUOTE]
I could see that, maybe. And, yeah, the explosion kind of sounds fake. But, I think the dog eating paint would be enough drama for publicity.
[QUOTE=Penultimate;36073836]I could see that, maybe. And, yeah, the explosion kind of sounds fake. But, I think the dog eating paint would be enough drama for publicity.[/QUOTE]
The explosion sounds real. Were it added in the editing process, it would probably be mixed better, in fact it would sound more 'realistic'. You can tell this really happened because of how loud it was that it makes the mics clip and distort for a second. Which is what happens when you anticipate volume levels that are much lower than what you end up encountering.
Also anyone saying the fire didn't look real has just never experienced a flash fire before. Shit's intense, and yeah, it looks exactly like that. You do see the fire in the video. You even see what appear to be ashes float by the front of the camera after they set it down.
You also have to remember that this occurred in an apartment building. There isn't a single person in the entire world who would give permission for something like this to happen in a building with multiple tenants. You could easily film it on a set, but this a building full of places where people live.
if you're saying it's fake
it's not like spray paint is flammable when it comes out of the can or anything
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;36073917]You could still just add all that in with some sort of movie editing program. The whole thing just looks so fake, why would the person filming it first walk away from the kitchen then walk back in there just to put his camera down?[/QUOTE]
Didn't you hear the people talking? The camera man basically goes toward the bathroom where the girl took the dog because it's imperative that she knows immediately that her kitchen is on fire. And so once this information is relayed, he returns to the source of concern, the kitchen, and then probably sets his camera down so that he can do something useful and not accidentally kill a building full of tenants while trying to film stupid pet videos.
And yes, of course you can mix the audio so it sounds that way in editing, but for proper production value, you just wouldn't, you'd use an explosion sound that sounds more 'real' to people (if you were next to a real explosion, you wouldn't hear clipping - the mics clipped because they weren't prepared for the volume levels and were caught by suprise). So I think the fact that it's so genuine is what leads people to say it's fake because it's just so different from all the fake stuff they've ever seen that it's jarring.
You have to ask yourself first: why would they fake this? And if you say because publicity, then you have to ask: are they really that desperate for publicity? Probably not.
[QUOTE=SoaringScout;36073982]You have to ask yourself first: why would they fake this? And if you say because publicity, then you have to ask: are they really that desperate for publicity? Probably not.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, they couldn't be desperate enough to endanger a building full of people, because you don't need publicity stunts to get twenty million youtube views, you just need either sexuality or pets being cute. They were trying to film the latter in this case and an accident occurred.
Like I said, I think what makes people say it's fake is how different it looks from TV and movie stuff. When something's fake, the production value is usually much higher and the camera never gets distracted because the camera man knows he's here to film the scripted thing that's supposed to happen.
And no, the spray paint igniting isn't odd at all, have you ever actually played with one of those things and some fire before? That's exactly what happens. I've thrown lots of cans of spray stuff into fires, when you grow up poor sometimes you have to find your own entertainment. I promise you that's exactly what really happens, you can go out and get your own paint and try it yourself.
I can't understand why the dog attacks cleaning supplies. Can't even think of an off the wall thought process the dog would be going through.
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;36074030]Um... I'm talking about the entire fire being fake. I'm not saying the dog fucking up the can of paint is not real, but the fire part is just ridiculous[/QUOTE]
It's not, though. Like I said, if you're saying stuff like that, you've just never really seen something like this happen before. I have, I've seen it plenty of times, that's [I]exactly[/I] what it looks like. I've seen grease fires, I've thrown these kinds of spray cans into fires, this is exactly what it looks like, I assure you. Please please please try it for yourself if you can make it safe enough.
The reason it looks so 'fake' to you is because you're used to seeing stuff that's actually fake. I don't know if you get into Space and astrophysics and stuff, but Niel Tyson talks about this kind of thing. Growing up in Brooklyn, he never saw stars growing up, until he first went to the planetarium. He thought surely it was fake, have these people seen the sky? There's like three stars up there. So whenever he goes to a location where you can actually see the real night sky in all its brilliance, in his mind, it actually reminds him of the fake planetarium sky.
Basically what I'm saying is that you're comparing this real event to fake staged events and the comparison just isn't valid because it's like comparing a real explosion to a hollywood explosion.
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;36074088]Then again I do know how explosions look like and sound like, you're just throwing wild assumptions around. Everything from the actual fire and how everybody seems to act towards it seems just odd to me[/QUOTE]
That's exactly how people have reacted in my real life experiences. I'm not really making any more assumptions than you are. Maybe it just seems odd to you because you're comparing it to staged shots where the camera guy keeps filming because he knows what's supposed to happen?
I mean of course this real event would seem odd as hell if all you'd ever seen was fake fires. You'd be all like 'but this is nothing like what I've seen before'. Like, say for example, your only experience with 'accidental' fires is seeing that once scene in the movie Mrs Doubtfire where robin williams accidentally sets his fake tits on fire. Comparing that to this, you'd definitely think this was odd as hell.
And I mean everyone's seen a real fire before, but I'm talking about an accidental situation like this. In real accidents like this, people do panic, that's just how it really works. It's not like the movies.
fire extinguisher??
[QUOTE=Protocol7;36073674]well the effects that happen on camera when it "explodes" look so fake[/QUOTE]
I agree with this - the actual effect looked like cheesy CGI and the audio didn't seem right either. I'm not a video expert, but come on guys. Who the fuck sits around filming like an idiot when a dog just put spray paint all over your kitchen. Better yet, who the fuck keeps black spray paint under a sink?
I'm not saying that the video couldn't be reproduction/remake for the sake of explanation or that the actual events can't physically happen. Just sayin' this video looks to be anything but real. :v:
[QUOTE=Pie108;36074044]I can't understand why the dog attacks cleaning supplies. Can't even think of an off the wall thought process the dog would be going through.[/QUOTE]
"Oh shit, stuff that smells!"
I think that's pretty much my dog's thought process.
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;36074179]I understand your point, but it's still so very silly that if the person using the camera was in panic or something why does he keep so sure not to point the camera at the fire. I don't know about you, but I sure would point the camera at it instead of shit around it[/QUOTE]
Well I mean yeah, that's my point, that's exactly what you should expect from a professionally produced production where everyone involved has an explicit role and the camera man understands that it's his job to film the fire, on a set where smoke inhalation isn't a real concern, so it would be okay to just focus on getting a good shot of the action.
Whereas, in a real accident like this, the camera man immediately realizes he's INSIDE of an apartment that's ON FIRE, so he runs towards the bathroom to alert homegirl, and then does his best to contribute constructively to the situation. See since this is real life, the filming of the fire doesn't matter. What mattered was the immediate threats to everyone's safety.
It'd be different if this happened outdoors. An outdoor accident like this, yeah, I can easily see someone standing there to make sure they get the shot. I mean you're outside, there are less safety concerns. But this was a little closed up apartment with a kitchen no bigger than many walk-in closets. You're a much braver man than I if you could stand there in that situation and get the shot.
Also I'd imagine everyone else in the building would have been pissed at the camera man if he concentrated on getting the shot. Like even if it was all okay afterwards, I'm sure homegirl would be like "what the fuck man, where were you, what were you doing when my kitchen was burning right in front of us".
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
