|
Post by JenGe on Nov 3, 2006 13:48:10 GMT -5
Shaun of the Dead has caused an issue which I think does need to be addressed...flashback, hallucination, dream kills. These are kills that are actually shown on the screen but in the "reality" of a given film a character is not actually killed at that time. Personally I believe these do need to be represented somewhere in the final "kill count" of a film since something is shown on the screen. The filmmakers have taken the time to actually show a body...an "on screen kill." I do think though that the final tally should specify how many of those are actually "imagined" and how many are "reality" based to the film. The question really is in how a character gets that count. Now obviously an actor should be credited those additional "imagined" kills since they were shown on screen but should a character get multiple counts for the same person being killed numerous times? Once we work this out I will add it to the site's guidelines to alleviate any further or future confusion. Reference: Shaun of the Dead threads... moviebodycounts.proboards80.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1151874188&page=1moviebodycounts.proboards80.com/index.cgi?board=corrections&action=display&thread=1162551804&page=1
|
|
|
Post by davethejew on Nov 3, 2006 14:15:47 GMT -5
Also im pointing out in general, sometimes we dont know what is reality and what is a dream/drug sequence, how would we specify what to what. Some of the greatest horror, sci fi and fantasy kills happen in a dream like state. You can reference most of the sci fi films ive done, Videodrome especially, the entire movie is an acid trip.
|
|
|
Post by igniteice on Nov 3, 2006 14:20:20 GMT -5
Alright - I voted no and here we go for why...
There are crazy amounts of spoilers all throughout here.
When I watch a movie and I think to myself, "Wow, there have been a lot of deaths here" (any Die Hard type movie raises that question, for instance) and I look it up, my real question is always, "How many people were killed?" So this thread addresses... what do we consider the defition of a person is?
In the movie One Hour Photo, Robbin Williams character has a dream he is standing alone in an empty store that he works at - the shelves are empty - and he has his eyes closed. The camera zooms in on his eyes and they open and blood starts pooring out - then he covers his face with his eyes and blood starts gushing out like his face is about to explode - his hands covered in blood... then he wakes up.
This would clearly be the death of the main character if this were really a death. Instead, it's just his mind. I don't think anyone would watch it and say, "Well, One Hour Photo has one on-screen death." Because immediately afterwards anyone else would say, "Who died?" And the answer is of course, no one, because it was just a dream.
In Shaun of the Dead specifically, the creators of the film have chosen to show this flashback - yes, for a reason - but I don't think that reason was to show Philip being killed. It was a talked about process to show that Shaun and Ed have given thought to how they are going to do all these different things (pick up Liz, pick up Shaun's mother, take care of Philip, and finally where they are going to settle down at - The Winchester.) It's a comedy element of the film that they actually show these imagined scenarios acted out (especially noted by how they are all skipping, holding hands, and laughing, as they walk away from just having 'killed' Philip.) Furthermore, how they imagine it, isn't how it actually happens. And lastly, in the first count, it was counted as 6 kills, because Shaun and Ed both bashed Philip's head in. I don't see how this constitutes as 6 separate kills, when it's only 3 scenarios. For instance, in any war movie, if an enemy soldier is shot at by three different people, it shouldn't count as 3 kills - only one person died.
In Groundhog Day - he commits suicide several times (most notably by driving his car off a cliff, which explodes in a fiery blaze at the bottom of a canyon.) He comes back, because he can't die. This frustrates him. Would I count this as an on-screen death? No - I'd make note of it - but I wouldn't count it. I highly doubt the creators would say, "Yeah, he dies in the movie," because he doesn't (in one of his monologues, Bill Murray's character says, "I've killed myself so many different ways - stabbed myself, shot myself, drowned, electrocuted," etc.)
Run Lola Run is another very debatable movie - there are three 'realities' in the movie and in the first two, Lola dies - but she can somehow change the outcome, and it starts over. The last reality is the way the film ends (she lives.) Again, I wouldn't count her first two deaths as actual on-screen kills, because the film-makers are saying, "That's not how it happened."
Or maybe we'll use the movie Clue as an example. Six murders take place - at the end of it, there are several flashbacks showing some of the various kills. For instance, they show the cop being hit over the head, same with the driver - these are fatal hits (a lead pipe for the cop and a wrench for the driver, for instance.) But there were still only six murders... not twelve, just because they showed a dead body the first time and the killing itself the second time.
------
I should note the obvious exception to this: some movies have sequences in which a person is talked about having died, and we never "see" this until someone later has a dream about the event, or it's shown in a flashback. In this case, it was a "real" event that is being shown. I wouldn't count it again though if it's a recurring nightmare that they have. As the rules state, a person can only be counted once.
Flashbacks to me usually imply something really happened and the movie is showing it again (or for the first time.)
For instance - in Vanilla Sky, we see a flashback showing Tom Cruise's character take a bottle of pills and fall over dead. This is his real suicide (as mentioned later in the film.) I would definitely count this as a death in the movie, because it's the entire reason he is in his lucid dream (he signed the contract.) It's a REAL death of a character in the film. He's not imagining that he died, basically.
12 Monkeys is another movie that comes to mind, because Bruce Willis's character does die at the end of the film (as he states... "I remember someone died... it was me.") Of course, this opens up a lot of debate in the "time traveling" corner, but that's not what is in question - does Bruce Willis really die? Yeah, he does. He gets shot several times and who witnesses it? Himself (as a child.) He witnesses his own death. That plays a huge part of the movie, because he's always had these little flashbacks of seeing someone die, but up until the end of the film, he never knows who he saw die.
Donnie Darko... in my mind, only one person dies in the movie - Donnie Darko. The entire point of the movie was that he went back in time to save the girl. I wouldn't count her death (getting ran over by the car) as real, because that's not how the film ends. I believe movies should be treated with their realities and noted as such. If you want - Donnie Darko has a few kills in it (Gretchen dies, and Donnie Darko shoots Frank in the eye killing him - but in this reality, Donnie Darko doesn't die.) When he goes back in time after this, he goes back to before any of that happened, to alter the course of what would happen. And thus, Gretchen doesn't die, but Donnie Does (from the jet engine from the plane his mother was on.)
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 3, 2006 14:40:03 GMT -5
Alright - I voted no and here we go for why... There are crazy amounts of spoilers all throughout here.When I watch a movie and I think to myself, "Wow, there have been a lot of deaths here" (any Die Hard type movie raises that question, for instance) and I look it up, my real question is always, "How many people were killed?" So this thread addresses... what do we consider the defition of a person is? In the movie One Hour Photo, Robbin Williams character has a dream he is standing alone in an empty store that he works at - the shelves are empty - and he has his eyes closed. The camera zooms in on his eyes and they open and blood starts pooring out - then he covers his face with his eyes and blood starts gushing out like his face is about to explode - his hands covered in blood... then he wakes up. This would clearly be the death of the main character if this were really a death. Instead, it's just his mind. I don't think anyone would watch it and say, "Well, One Hour Photo has one on-screen death." Because immediately afterwards anyone else would say, "Who died?" And the answer is of course, no one, because it was just a dream. This thread is not to debate whether a film will get credit for an imagined kill. I have already made that decision in regards to this site. It is not open for debate. A film will get credit for ANY death shown either imaginary or reality based though the final tally will note the two. Please stick to the subject at hand...should characters get the credit?
|
|
|
Post by davethejew on Nov 3, 2006 15:17:49 GMT -5
*Spoiler* Lets take for example the psychological horror film Jacob's Ladder, in that movie at least 50 kills are shown, mostly horror and war related, and in the end of the movie we realize that the entire movie we had just watched, just a near death hallucination that Tim Robbins had while in a Medic's Office. What about then? You can't just come on a site as a new user and start badmouthing counts and making shit up. You have no real counts to back your claims up, and you're questioning and arguing with the owner and moderator of the site, Jen, do you really think its smart to do that? Go start your own kill site.
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 3, 2006 15:27:12 GMT -5
*Spoiler* Lets take for example the psychological horror film Jacob's Ladder, in that movie at least 50 kills are shown, mostly horror and war related, and in the end of the movie we realize that the entire movie we had just watched, just a near death hallucination that Tim Robbins had while in a Medic's Office. What about then? You can't just come on a site as a new user and start badmouthing counts and making shit up. You have no real counts to back your claims up, and you're questioning and arguing with the owner and moderator of the site, Jen, do you really think its smart to do that? Go start your own kill site. Dave, the problem is though that I have not actually stated the guidelines in regards to this type of film. This is my fault and omission. I really do need to address this. I feel bad that your count on Shaun has finally led me to do this. It really does need to be officially addressed and stated how the site will handle these but once I decide the issue will be the same for all films counted here. Your count but forced something I neglected to state and clarify. Sorry!!!
|
|
|
Post by igniteice on Nov 3, 2006 15:58:08 GMT -5
*Spoiler* Lets take for example the psychological horror film Jacob's Ladder, in that movie at least 50 kills are shown, mostly horror and war related, and in the end of the movie we realize that the entire movie we had just watched, just a near death hallucination that Tim Robbins had while in a Medic's Office. What about then? You can't just come on a site as a new user and start badmouthing counts and making shit up. You have no real counts to back your claims up, and you're questioning and arguing with the owner and moderator of the site, Jen, do you really think its smart to do that? Go start your own kill site. This is the type of utter bullshit that shouldn't even be on this board. I'm glad you want to have your secluded site, but if you want your counts to be at all valid, than you would welcome any debates set forth. Jen, control your members, particularly this asshole, and maybe you'd have more people willing to help out. The fact that I get yelled at and dismissed for trying to challenge a count is just bullshit. It puts this entire site to shame. If I say, "No, that count isn't accurate," I shouldn't be told to fuck off and make my own site. Hey - great members you got there JenGe. I'm out of here. He really crossed the line. You set up a thread specifically for debating and look at the bullshit response I get for trying to debate it. You can't just come on a site as a new user and start badmouthing counts and making shit up. You have no real counts to back your claims up, and you're questioning and arguing with the owner and moderator of the site, Jen, do you really think its smart to do that? Go start your own kill site. Yes I can. Anyone can. And you should fucking hope people do, otherwise this site would just be a fucking list that no one pays any attention to. Why the fuck should anyone actually believe any of the counts for any of the movies here when any attempts to dispute those counts are REJECTED? "Oh yeah, it's definitely correct, because we say so." Fucking brilliant.
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 3, 2006 16:16:17 GMT -5
Jen, control your members, particularly this asshole, Sorry, I do not even try to "control" my members. Accurate?? By what standard...yours...mine?? All counts here are measured by my guidelines. If you want something else, another guideline than actually you really do need to start your own site. As I stated to you privately for the most part counts are subjective. There will always be discrepancies due to the way films are made, edited, and created. I deal with it...you deal with it but for this site I make the final decisions. Actually I do not see rejection at all. Both of you boys certainly are passionate but as I stated I reserve all final decisions. Not you...not Dave. I weigh the input and make a judgement, establish guidelines.
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 3, 2006 17:10:19 GMT -5
Quick question, I've emailed a notice about this thread out to the members of the board. Did any of you get it??
|
|
ronnoc
Full Member
Some dumbass at a computer
Posts: 106
|
Post by ronnoc on Nov 3, 2006 17:42:43 GMT -5
No, but there was a neat little thing at the top of the fourm, yelling at me to come in here. It was pretty cool. I think they should. No real resoin behind it.
|
|
|
Post by wheels128 on Nov 3, 2006 21:20:02 GMT -5
"The fact that I get yelled at and dismissed for trying to challenge a count is just bullshit. It puts this entire site to shame."
Sad but true. Anyone here who doesn't agree 100% with Dave gets abused, it's not that hard to respectfully disagree.
EDIT: Oh, and I got the e-mail.
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Nov 3, 2006 21:43:16 GMT -5
" The fact that I get yelled at and dismissed for trying to challenge a count is just bullshit. It puts this entire site to shame." Sad but true. Anyone here who doesn't agree 100% with Dave gets abused, it's not that hard to respectfully disagree. EDIT: Oh, and I got the e-mail. Thanks Wheels!! I agree that Dave has an abrasive style to him and some may see that as abuse. To redo someones count though as a newbie without opening it up first to a discussion/debate I think is a risky move. A tad glass house. Obviously it was a valid question that igniteice has and one that needs to be addressed. Did Dave over react to the question? I say yes. Did Dave overreact to igniteice taking over his count and claiming that it "isn't accurate" without a discussion? No, I think not. Respect goes both ways.
|
|
ronnoc
Full Member
Some dumbass at a computer
Posts: 106
|
Post by ronnoc on Nov 3, 2006 23:29:54 GMT -5
" The fact that I get yelled at and dismissed for trying to challenge a count is just bullshit. It puts this entire site to shame." Sad but true. Anyone here who doesn't agree 100% with Dave gets abused, it's not that hard to respectfully disagree. EDIT: Oh, and I got the e-mail. Thanks Wheels!! I agree that Dave has an abrasive style to him and some may see that as abuse. To redo someones count though as a newbie without opening it up first to a discussion/debate I think is a risky move. A tad glass house. Obviously it was a valid question that igniteice has and one that needs to be addressed. Did Dave over react to the question? I say yes. Did Dave overreact to igniteice taking over his count and claiming that it "isn't accurate" without a discussion? No, I think not. Respect goes both ways. Abrasive is the word, but Dave is a badass. Really, if there was enough members, I would suggest he be made a mod. Edit: Hey, I did get the e-mail!
|
|
|
Post by davethejew on Nov 4, 2006 16:31:41 GMT -5
Thanks ronnoc, you're giving me too much credit. Wheels, arnie, and wraith deserved to be made moderators before me anyday. They've done more counts and been here longer, i just do high profile, large count movies.
Anyway i think this argument is moot, it seems as if mr igniteice has left us in a hissy fit, but im glad to see how many responses we're getting. I'm proud to be part of this board.
|
|
|
Post by yoshimitzu on Nov 23, 2006 9:28:22 GMT -5
I voted "yes" a death shown is a death shown, the only time I would say it should not be counted is if it is the same person, I think 1 person should only be counted once, even in the Zombie situation. Dave is right about not being able to tell what is real and what is not in films that push the reality / perception borders. I must say that igniteice Guest made some very solid points as well however. Take a film like Total Recall for example, is it dream, is it real? When does he actually wake up? That sort of thing is my rational for voting yes. If you see the death on screen it should be counted.
|
|
bigb
New Member
Posts: 28
|
Post by bigb on Feb 10, 2008 4:02:30 GMT -5
I voted yes. As they are never-the-less kills. But i do understand the disputes people have !
|
|
rgd51
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by rgd51 on Mar 8, 2009 23:38:11 GMT -5
I would say that it should count as you see the death.
|
|