• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

Why hasn't someone video taped their whole life?

rolling stoned, check out the up series i linked to. it's the closest thing you'll really get to this nonsensical idea. really, it won't be remembered for very long. no one will really care. like the blogs thedeceased spoke about.

if you're looking for some cheap claim to fame, keep looking. eat your own scrotum, film it, host it online. you will be remembered a lot longer for doing that than filming your inconsequential life.
 
Thanks, I'll check out the Up Series.
I have to disagree with you L2R. I think people would remember someone filming their whole life rather than eating their scrotum. Sure a whole life would be boring, but it's not the content of the film that would be remembered, but rather that someone actually had the scrotum to film their whole life, while no one else had.

BTW, people eat scrotum all the time, that's boring IMO because it's already been done.
 
okay i'll grant that. in fact, the children's show on the tv this morning was nothing but scrotum eating. ;)
 
How does this hypothetical person have sex with people? Do they only fuck people who are willing to do it on camera (and have the footage shown to the world)?

You might be able to convince some skank to do so, but nobody would ever have a serious relationship with someone who was filming themselves 24 hours a day.

The film-maker may have agreed to (or been forced into from the moment they were born) exposing their entire lives, warts and all, but it's pretty unlikely that they're ever going to find anyone willing to do the same.

How do they do anything illegal without later incriminating themselves?

The constant presence of a camera would make life next to impossible. The act of documenting interferes with the thing you are documenting. In this case, yourself. You would not be able to live a life if you were constantly making a film about it.

Or, at least, the life would be incredibly boring. Seven hundred thousand hours of footage of a celibate hermit. This is not a historical accomplishment.

If you were to somehow successfully document an entire life without interfering with it, avoiding all the Shrodinger's cat pitfalls, then you might have something.

But, as someone else said, that's impossible. Even if you didn't tell anyone you were filming them and used hidden cameras all the time, you would still know that you were being documented. The only way it could possibly work is in a Truman Show type scenario where everything is controlled and the focus of the documentary (whoever it happens to be) is unaware that they are being watched - which is obviously a massive breach of ethics.

I don't think you're really thinking this through, rollingstoned.

Sure a whole life would be boring, but it's not the content of the film that would be remembered, but rather that someone actually had the scrotum to film their whole life, while no one else had.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that filming your whole life requires a large scrotum. It's not the sort of thing that takes balls/courage to do. It requires highly concentrated stupidity.

We're so obsessed with our own image, with collecting photographs and footage of ourselves and showing it to other people. Everybody has a camera. Digital cameras mean that there is no limit to the number of photographs you can take, so everyone takes thousands of shit photographs rather than a handful of really memorable ones.

Your concept is the epitome of this quantity-over-quality mentality.

Someone will probably attempt to do this. It's the evolution of the sort of pointless activities self-obsessed people are engaging in at the moment.

Some idiot will sacrifice their entire lives to make a film that nobody will ever see.

And, nobody will remember them (or their scrotum).

:)

http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com...to-both-Poles-solo-and-unsupported/106221.htm

^Remember this guy?
 
Well, obviously noone has recorded their entire lives and there are many flaws in that idea as pointed out, but some have come close.
Yes, Tarnation, and Jonas Mekas released a 5 hour film called As I Was Moving Ahead Occasionally I Saw Brief Glimpses of Beauty that documents 50 years of his videodiaries. The rest of his work is mainly in that same vein. Good luck finding it, though.
 
I agree that this idea is incredibly dumb but what I really came in here to say is I hope TheDeceased never stops posting. His razzing is so fucking funny! :D Especially:

b) Why would they go down in history for ever? It would take an entire lifetime to watch the film so obviously nobody is ever going to watch it, including the person who made it. So how exactly are they going to go down in history 'forever'? ... or do you mean like in the Guinness Book of the Worlds biggest Assholes? Cause yeah they'd probably get in there.
Click to expand...

I'm still laughing.

MP's Truman Show comment was pretty awesome too.
 
Mysterie said:
heres something close to videotaping your life in a sense

noah takes a photo of himself everyday for 6 years

its really interesting
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you'd agree that a single photograph of that guy isn't particularly interesting, so why is a montage of 2190 photographs of him interesting? People take photos of the interesting parts of their lives. I'd rather see a montage of those, if anything. But generally speaking I don't even like looking at friends/family's photos most of the time. When people start pulling out albums or plugging their cameras into the television, I leave the room. And those are photos of people I love in exotic or interesting places. Whereas this video is a series of uninspired random snapshots of an ordinary looking guy staring into a lens (with a classical score). I understand how he might like to jerk off his ego while watching himself, but what do you get out of it?

^This is a serious question.

What is interesting about the long-term documentation of the banal? Is it the simply the length of documentation that interests you? Or, is it possible that you find it fascinating because of the subject matter?

If a weasel took a photo of itself every day, would that still be interesting? What if the same weasel took a photo of it's asshole every day?

I mean, is it just a lot of information you want, regardless of content?
(Quantity over quality?)

Or, am I missing something?
 
TheDeceased said:
I'm pretty sure you'd agree that a single photograph of that guy isn't particularly interesting, so why is a montage of 2190 photographs of him interesting? People take photos of the interesting parts of their lives. I'd rather see a montage of those, if anything. But generally speaking I don't even like looking at friends/family's photos most of the time. When people start pulling out albums or plugging their cameras into the television, I leave the room. And those are photos of people I love in exotic or interesting places. Whereas this video is a series of uninspired random snapshots of an ordinary looking guy staring into a lens (with a classical score). I understand how he might like to jerk off his ego while watching himself, but what do you get out of it?

^This is a serious question.

What is interesting about the long-term documentation of the banal? Is it the simply the length of documentation that interests you? Or, is it possible that you find it fascinating because of the subject matter?

If a weasel took a photo of itself every day, would that still be interesting? What if the same weasel took a photo of it's asshole every day?

I mean, is it just a lot of information you want, regardless of content?
(Quantity over quality?)

Or, am I missing something?
Click to expand...

It just interested me because it was kind of like a time lapse of his life, the way his hair grew and you could tell when he had it cut and I liked the repetitive music that is kind of like something philip glass would write.

and no a weasel's asshole every day wouldnt interest me, but each to their own, you dont have to like noah's video 8)

btw for the fans of the simpsons they did a parody of that video
 
I didn't get much of an insight into him (didn't get too far through the video). Sure, you could probably ascertain with reasonable accuracy when he had his haircut, but I'm still not sure how that interests you. If it was time lapse footage of David Bowie and you belonged to the David Bowie fan club, then it would make more sense. But you don't even know this guy. He's just some random asshole shifting from one disinteresting setting to another. It baffles me as to how that passes for mindless entertainment let alone something you would describe as really interesting. My only guess, given that earlier you were less than keen on documenting assholes, is that you are obsessed with or in awe of the human form to some extent. That would explain why you enjoy watching time lapse footage of inanimate expressionless people rather than time lapse footage of inanimate expressionless weasels.
 
rollingstoned! said:
My point is that it has not been done, won't cause any harm, and has an easy capacity to be done so why hasn't it? No one would be forced to watch it.
Click to expand...

Clearly you're severely underestimating the amount of money/physical space/resources/commitment it would take just to record an entire life let alone to play it back. Assuming it's an "average" lifespan.
 
Assuming it's an "average" lifespan.
Click to expand...

Aha!

Entire lives have already been filmed.

Babies that die during, or soon after, birth. Nobody's going to remember them in a hurry. Slimy little inanimate bastards.

Case closed.
 
Belisarius said:
This is basically why: Coupon: The Movie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLnoLmCqT30
Click to expand...


LOLLLLLLLLLlllllllllllllll!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The above quote is definately the best answer, lol, but one more is that filming your "whole life" would be hell for even the most "interesting" or "popular" (lol) people.

I doubt anyone would watch an unedited version of ANYONE's whole life.. Then again, do the words truman show mean anything to you? What about the words jersey shore? XD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top