Comments on: It’s Real? Man Being Eaten By Lions

By: Rahab

Rahab — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:15:30 +0000

I sincerely hope your right…

By: Jesus_H_Christ

Jesus_H_Christ — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:37:43 +0000

Today I learned that 10dailythings.com is apparently a repository for underage retards.

My favorite bit of genius thus far?

“I hate to say, but it is real. It really did happen. I also saw the footage in the seventies in an Italian Documentary at the cinema.”

hahahahaha. Yeah, that 70’s Italian Documentary you saw in the grindhouse theatre? That was a mondo film, ie- a “shockumentary” featuring staged footage for shock value. Explicit sex, nudity or violence was illegal in US films in the 70s unless it could be argued that it was for educational or documentary purposes as opposed to simply being for perverted titilation purposes, the so-called “prurient interest”.

Thus, even if they had not wanted to (which of course they did), mondo filmmakers were forced to present all of their footage as real because admitting they had staged any of the gory scenes would be proving to the government that the film was not actually trying to educationally document a real event and was just an excuse to for weirdos to watch stuff die on screen, even if it didn’t actually die, if you get my point.

What this means was that not only was it the director’s goal to make the staged scenes as believably realistic as possible, it was also in his best interests if he wanted to get the film approved as a documentary in the US. The exploitation film directors turned this into an art form; the Guinea Pig torture/gore films, for instance, are shockingly realistic if you don’t know how to spot the low-budget slip ups. Fooled Charlie Sheen and (briefly) the Japanese government, anyway.

Go read the Snopes thread, and re-watch the video while noticing all the inconsistencies and crafty editing techniques. Learn how these guys did it. Only then will you actually learn something from this.

And for the love of shit, all you idiots going “OMG TEH LION 8 HIM”, turn on your fucking common sense detectors, please.

By: reia

reia — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:08:50 +0000

lol educational..
?

By: Guest

Guest — Sun, 24 May 2009 17:34:22 +0000

Actually, this is a little tricky. The video at youtube is taken from Faces of Death part 1, for which already a documentary exists, about which scenes were faked, which were real, and which real scenes were too short so they added additional and staged scenes. This scene is such a combination scene, which explains the apparently strange “camera work”. The scene from the beginning (the guy sneaking out of his car), some shots of his “relatives” and maybe some fighting scequences are added. Unfortunately, Pit Dernitz got really mauled by lions, and the differences to other movies (FoD1 is not the first one) demonstrate this. Check IMDB for Pit Dernitz death location

By: Thomas

Thomas — Fri, 22 May 2009 00:46:51 +0000

To the morons who thought this was real.

Do you really think the person holding the camera would take a shot of the guys 2 year old kid crying their eyes out while their Dad is being savaged to death.

Use your fucking brains.

By: Zura

Zura — Wed, 20 May 2009 17:47:10 +0000

I suppose that I can understand how so many people would be convinced that the attack depicted in the footage is real, as most people have no experience with big cats, but I can assure you that at least those portions of the film depicting the attack are almost certainly staged. I have worked with big cats for 31 years, and can promise you that a lion attack is an explosive, ferocious thing that always proceeds in the same manner – at least for the initial attack – I’ve seen inexperienced hunters do some oddball things after the takedown. The body language of the attacking lions is 100% wrong. Further, the damage depicted in no way reflects the actual damage that I have witnessed in two separate big cat attacks on humans (mountain lion and tiger). Neither attack was deadly, but the victims in both attacks were terribly clawed and bitten and reduced to bloody pulp in seconds. It was shocking even for me, as their usual prey animals have much tougher hides – human flesh gives way like butter by comparison.

Anyhow, the footage is almost certainly false – at least with respect to the attack. However, I am in no way discounting the fact that such attacks do happen. I am sure that such footage exists – I am aware of some footage of the bloody aftermath of an attack by a small caged lion that is very real and very terrible.

By: camille

camille — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 08:48:20 +0000

this would be horrible if it was real.so, im just going to try to convince myself it is, for comfort. :S first of all, the way the cut to the family, what video camera does that with out editing? and again, if it WAS real, dont you think this would’v been on the news. sure, it was the seventies, but it would still be referred to in today’s media. i dont know though.. there isn’t enough sufficient information to make this real

…or fake. :/

By: monkeyman

monkeyman — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 08:33:51 +0000

What did I say about so called professionals? Wolfgang, you are not in any better position to know than anyone else just because you’ve seen an archive with it in! You said you are a photographer, what’s that got to do with film editing anyway?! Furthermore, intellectual or otherwise, ownership is not acquired ‘over time’. It is more likely that Sony distributed an edited copy to the TV stations as part of a consortium for the purpose of the show in question. The original footage however belonged to ‘World AudioVisual Corporation’ and can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkyrvB5nPW0

I do agree that Wikipedia often has unsubstantiated information, but to come to the conclusion 50% of the information is wrong leads me to think you are making assumptions.

What I’m trying to say, is don’t bring your boasts to the table without facts you can prove. Even if Sony do own the recording rights, and it was shown on ‘Wild Kingdom’, does it answer the question at hand ‘is it real’? If not, no-one is interested in vague information about being a photographer, or having exclusive access to Sony’s video vault. I’ve been a photographer for 15 years, been editing video, writing music, and having full penetrative intercourse for just as long, but it doesn’t let me know whether this man was eaten by a lion.

Anyone else? Maybe someone out there has been going on safari for 50 years, and been a paper boy for 20, so clearly knows both everything about lions and then the most efficient was to distribute the video evidence?

Rant over…until the next moron.

By: Ivan

Ivan — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 08:22:12 +0000

Compaltely agree with Wolfgang. Eather these people were dumb to ralize it or they were so panic that they didn’t figure out scaring them with the vehicles. However, it so sad ;(

By: Wolfgang

Wolfgang — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 15:33:11 +0000

Hello people. I’m a contract photographer going on 35 years now and I can assure those who believe this to be a fake that it is not. This film has been cut for drama’s sake as it was shown on a Wild Kingdom show in 1976, although filmed two years earlier. It has been cut up because seeing the actual film would be very difficult for most people. The film in its entirety is owned by Sony Pictures as over time this is the company that has eventually come into ownership. I know this because I’ve done “board work” for Sony pictures and have seen many titles in their archives. What you’re seeing here is what someone recorded on their VHS back in the seventies from the show Wild Kingdom, it was part of a series of docudrama’s they showed regarding safety with animals. The reason it’s filmed in the manner it is, is because it is 1974, game wardens didn’t carry firearms, people were still somewhat naive and didn’t realize their vehicles would deter the animals and you’re also missing a lot of the video…..42 minutes of it to be exact. And by the way, I’d stop relying on Wiki for anything, insofar as my research entails they’re wrong 50% of the time.