MCN Blogs
Kim Voynar

By Kim Voynar Voynar@moviecitynews.com

Okay, Who Let the Filmmakers Have a Rifle?

Well, this one creates an interesting ethical dilemma for Tribeca Film Festival attendees who are also animal lovers/vegans/card-carrying members of PETA. Apparently two deer were illegally shot (and skinned and cooked, although that bit probably wasn’t illegal once the deer were already dead) in the filming of Tribeca Film Fest entry First Winter, about a group of Brooklyn new-age hippies/hipsters stranded in a remote farmhouse in the dead of winter with the food supply running out. And by “shot” I don’t mean “filmed,” or even “inadvertently shot by some PA screwing around with a loaded rifle.” I mean “shot” as in, the script called for a real live deer to be really shot and killed and skinned and roasted. For authenticity, I guess.

I know what my veggie and vegan friends would have to say about that … what do you say? Killing a wild animal just so you can record the killing (and skinning and roasting) for your film: Okay? Not cool, but not necessarily morally wrong? Or just flat-out ewwww?

2 Responses to “Okay, Who Let the Filmmakers Have a Rifle?”

  1. Leon says:

    If they actually ate it, then no more morally wrong than any other instance of going hunting, killing an animal, and eating it.

  2. DP says:

    yeah except the whole potching thing, and they only “ate” one.

Leave a Reply

Quote Unquotesee all »

“I’ve been pleasantly surprised by how many recappers, while clearly over their heads, are baseline sympathetic to finding themselves routinely unmoored, even if that means repeating over and over that this is closer to “avant-garde art” than  normal TV to meet the word count. My feed was busy connecting the dots to Peter Tscherkassky (gas station), Tony Conrad (the giant staring at feedback of what we’ve just seen), Pat O’Neill (bombs away) et al., and this is all apposite — visual and conceptual thinking along possibly inadvertent parallel lines. If recappers can’t find those exact reference points to latch onto, that speaks less to willful ignorance than to how unfortunately severed experimental film is from nearly all mainstream discussions of film because it’s generally hard to see outside of privileged contexts (fests, academia, the secret knowledge of a self-preserving circle working with a very finite set of resources and publicity access to the larger world); resources/capital/access/etc. So I won’t assign demerits for willful incuriosity, even if some recappers are reduced, in some unpleasantly condescending/bluffing cases, to dismissing this as a “student film” — because presumably experimentation is something the seasoned artist gets out of their system in maturity, following the George Lucas Model of graduating from Bruce Conner visuals to Lawrence Kasdan’s screenwriting.”
~ Vadim Rizov Goes For It, A Bit

“On the first ‘Twin Peaks,’ doing TV was like going from a mansion to a hut. But the arthouses are gone now, so cable television is a godsend — they’re the new art houses. You’ve got tons of freedom to do the work you want to do on TV, but there is a restriction in terms of picture and sound. The range of television is restricted. It’s hard for the power and the glory to come through. In other words, you can have things in a theater much louder and also much quieter. With TV, the quieter things have to be louder and the louder things have to be quieter, so you have less dynamics. The picture quality — it’s fine if you have a giant television with a good speaker system, but a lot of people will watch this on their laptops or whatever, so the picture and the sound are going to suffer big time. Optimally, people should be watching TV in a dark room with no disturbances and with as big and good a picture as possible and with as great sound as possible.”
~ David Lynch