Episode #95 "Borrasca"

[wolfie1996]

4 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said:

Animals are not human beings...they’re not people, this is true. However, I’m not okay with any forms of the abuse. It’s all despicable.

However, some TV shows or movies will try and realistically portray abuse...yes, sometimes for entertainment, but it’s usually not parts you’re supposed to like...they’re shown to portray how bad a person or situation is. 

No, they're "not people"  and therefore don't enjoy the protection against abuse and cruelty that people (many far from innocent, indeed absolute shits) do. Therefore are in more need of protectors. Though I'm sure you don't agree.

Edited May 14, 2021 by wolfie1996

[ViceFanMan]

42 minutes ago, wolfie1996 said:

No, they're "not people"  and therefore don't enjoy the protection against abuse and cruelty that people (many far from innocent, indeed absolute shits) do. Therefore are in more need of protectors. Though I'm sure you don't agree.

As I’ve said several times...I’m not okay with nor condone any abuse against anyone or anything. 

[wolfie1996]

1 minute ago, ViceFanMan said:

As I’ve said several times...I’m not okay with nor condone any abuse against anyone or anything. 

But you are. You defended this use of a bird allegedly to show some aspect of a story/person whatever. You did NOT condemn it or say this is INEXCUSABLE whatever reason it was included- like I did.

[ViceFanMan]

47 minutes ago, wolfie1996 said:

But you are. You defended this use of a bird allegedly to show some aspect of a story/person whatever. You did NOT condemn it or say this is INEXCUSABLE whatever reason it was included- like I did.

As I’ve said several times...I’m not okay with nor condone any abuse against anyone or anything.

What I also said is there will be TV shows & movies that do portray different kinds of abuse, depending on the plot & what the episode/movie is about. 

If you can’t handle that, you better stop watching crime things. 

[wolfie1996]

59 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said:

As I’ve said several times...I’m not okay with nor condone any abuse against anyone or anything.

What I also said is there will be TV shows & movies that do portray different kinds of abuse, depending on the plot & what the episode/movie is about. 

If you can’t handle that, you better stop watching crime things. 

No need to be impertinent  just because I was right. 

[ViceFanMan]

7 minutes ago, wolfie1996 said:

No need to be impertinent  just because I was right. 

Lol!!!  You’ve been “impertinent” with me in most of your posts...I just ignored it and explained why the episode is what it is, whether you like it or not. 

[wolfie1996]

1 minute ago, ViceFanMan said:

Lol!!!  You’ve been “impertinent” with me in most of your posts...I just ignored it and explained why the episode is what it is, whether you like it or not. 

No, I've been "right," VFM. And don't think you're going to have the last word because you aren't.

[ViceFanMan]

Just now, wolfie1996 said:

No, I've been "right," VFM. And don't think you're going to have the last word because you aren't.

It hasn’t really been about “right or wrong”...just why what was in the episode, was. If you don’t like that, that’s fine...don’t watch the episode.

[wolfie1996]

1 hour ago, ViceFanMan said:

It hasn’t really been about “right or wrong”...just why what was in the episode, was. If you don’t like that, that’s fine...don’t watch the episode.

You never give up, do you? This is  supposed to be a forum where  a member can post their views. I won't be losing any sleep tonight about your opinion anyway. And I'll watch what I please, and post opinions regardless. If you don't agree, I don't care.

[ViceFanMan]

1 hour ago, wolfie1996 said:

You never give up, do you? This is  supposed to be a forum where  a member can post their views. I won't be losing any sleep tonight about your opinion anyway. And I'll watch what I please, and post opinions regardless. If you don't agree, I don't care.

Lol!! Exactly...views about the episodes, characters, plots, etc... The personal problems I’ve pretty much ignored, and I’ve only referred to the episode and the plot and/or characters involved.

I understand you don’t like the episode...and that’s totally cool! But, rather than get all riled up about it, and start being rude & insulting just because someone else explains why certain aspects might be included in that episode...again, just don’t watch it if it bothers you that much.  

[wolfie1996]

2 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said:

Lol!! Exactly...views about the episodes, characters, plots, etc... The personal problems I’ve pretty much ignored, and I’ve only referred to the episode and the plot and/or characters involved.

I understand you don’t like the episode...and that’s totally cool! But, rather than get all riled up about it, and start being rude & insulting just because someone else explains why certain aspects might be included in that episode...again, just don’t watch it if it bothers you that much.  

Do you ever give up?I don't find your explanations convincing or acceptable and believe it or not I'm not obliged to.

[ViceFanMan]

2 hours ago, wolfie1996 said:

Do you ever give up?I don't find your explanations convincing or acceptable and believe it or not I'm not obliged to.

You don’t have to...that’s ok.  You just don’t have to get so upset or worked up over an episode...it’s just Miami Vice.  

Edited May 15, 2021 by ViceFanMan

[wolfie1996]

7 hours ago, ViceFanMan said:

You don’t have to...that’s ok.  You just don’t have to get so upset or worked up over an episode...it’s just Miami Vice.  

I'll get as "upset" as I like, thanks. And "irritated" is more what your responses make me. Such a shame there isn't a blocking capacity on here....

[Tom]

Just to step in to settle the fight here @wolfie1996@ViceFanMan:

did you guys ever consider that the cock was not harmed in this scene? I know it was the 80s where that was not common in movies or TV but...

We see the cock well in the first scene when Borrasca is sitting and petting it, then cut.

In the last scene of the teaser Borrasca is dropping an obviously dead cock (or hen? not enough to say exactly) on the dead guy´s body.

So, in all fairness, most of us eat chicken regularly and for that chicken need to be killed. I also despise abuse of animals but I also eat meat myself (only from biological farms in order to prevent bad animal treatment) and I have always arranged myself with this scene as I think they simply used an already dead chicken from the butcher for this last scene that would have been eaten anyway.

Could that perception be something to appease your nerves in this thread?

P.S. we all know that famous Charlie Guanci (RIP!) was the animal handler and trainer on the show, including Elvis. I doubt that he would have agreed to animal cruelty on the set?!

 

Edited May 15, 2021 by Tom

[wolfie1996]

6 minutes ago, Tom said:

Just to step in to settle the fight here @wolfie1996@ViceFanMan:

did you guys ever consider that the cock was not harmed in this scene? I know it was the 80s where that was not common in movies or TV but...

We see the cock well in the first scene when Borrasca is sitting and petting it, then cut.

In the last scene of the teaser Borrasca is dropping an obviously dead cock (or hen? not enough to say exactly) on the dead guy´s body.

So, in all fairness, most of us eat chicken regularly and for that chicken need to be killed. I also despise abuse of animals but I also eat meat myself (only from biological farms in order to prevent bad animal treatment) and I have always arranged myself with this scene as I think they simply used an already dead chicken from the butcher for this last scene that would have been eaten anyway.

Could that perception be something to appease your nerves in this thread?

P.S. we all know that famous Charlie Guanci (RIP!) was the animal handler and trainer on the show, including Elvis. I doubt that he would have agreed to animal cruelty on the set?!

 

Morning Tom!!!

Shall delay going up to the horses to reply to your  very well intentioned comment! What made me think it was  the same one was that the bird seemed identical to the one being petted, same colours and feather type  etc. I do know (not about the MV set of course as I wasn't there) that virtually all directors I've been on a set with wouldn't give a toss  about any animals being used, most didn't even care about us "supporting artistes" as they call them now   I actually had to intervene once to make sure some chickens were being properly cared for (brave or what, eh?) As for chicken, I don't eat it at all being vegetarian  Actually I look after my neighbour's rescued battery chickens (now turned into fine  birds) when they're away so obviously have truly free range eggs too. Much praise to you for eating properly sourced meat anyway.  And I'm glad they had a reputable animal handler on set (I'm sure it wasn't as common in those days!) Thanks for your response  

[Tom]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb wolfie1996:

Morning Tom!!!

Shall delay going up to the horses to reply to your  very well intentioned comment! What made me think it was  the same one was that the bird seemed identical to the one being petted, same colours and feather type  etc. I do know (not about the MV set of course as I wasn't there) that virtually all directors I've been on a set with wouldn't give a toss  about any animals being used, most didn't even care about us "supporting artistes" as they call them now   I actually had to intervene once to make sure some chickens were being properly cared for (brave or what, eh?) As for chicken, I don't eat it at all being vegetarian  Actually I look after my neighbour's rescued battery chickens (now turned into fine  birds) when they're away so obviously have truly free range eggs too. Much praise to you for eating properly sourced meat anyway.  And I'm glad they had a reputable animal handler on set (I'm sure it wasn't as common in those days!) Thanks for your response  

I know what you mean as my daughter also works in this industry. But there is a difference between animal neglect and really killing it on purpose. What I want to say: I strongly doubt that anyone on the MV set killed the cock with his own hands for the final scene. That would have been impossible even in the 80s (SAG union members would not have accepted this, as actors always have been very animal loving). And, that the feathers looked the same was for sure not a coincidence but a detail that they considered when providing a (dead) second animal for that part.

P.S. I have a cat myself and had water turtles for decades that were rescued from a black market seller.

[fakespyder]

I had always assumed that the dead bird was a prop (ie. not real)

[wolfie1996]

3 hours ago, Tom said:

I know what you mean as my daughter also works in this industry. But there is a difference between animal neglect and really killing it on purpose. What I want to say: I strongly doubt that anyone on the MV set killed the cock with his own hands for the final scene. That would have been impossible even in the 80s (SAG union members would not have accepted this, as actors always have been very animal loving). And, that the feathers looked the same was for sure not a coincidence but a detail that they considered when providing a (dead) second animal for that part.

P.S. I have a cat myself and had water turtles for decades that were rescued from a black market seller.

Oh well you will know what they were like (though I have to say Stephen Daldry shook my hand (as a very humble extra) when I arrived for one scene in a film- lovely guy! Should never have washed that hand again  ) No most probably they didn't- let's hope it's as you say and they got a lookalike cockerel for that scene.  Fancy you having a cat, too! We have  4, one of  whom we acquired when a 92 year old friend passed away! Leo was 10 then and no kidding he's had a lot wrong with him poor little guy (hyperthyroid, which we got the radioactive injection for- dear but worth it)- a disintegrating disc in his back which he needed an MRI scan for THEN went all the way down to Surrey and Professor Noel Fitzpatrick's place to get fixed (weren't on TV though,sadly but he  did  a great job!) Can recommend that procedure too if your moggie is unfortunate  enough to need it. Noel's a lovely man!! Big hugs when you go down there (as good as Sonny's!) and he's exceptionally skillful.Thank you for rescuing the water turtles. You are rising in my estimation all the time, Tom, and not so many people do   Good of you to step into this argument, it was becoming rather wearing! And I apologise for going off topic cat wise but info is always useful!

[ViceFanMan]

6 hours ago, Tom said:

Just to step in to settle the fight here @wolfie1996@ViceFanMan:

did you guys ever consider that the cock was not harmed in this scene? I know it was the 80s where that was not common in movies or TV but...

We see the cock well in the first scene when Borrasca is sitting and petting it, then cut.

In the last scene of the teaser Borrasca is dropping an obviously dead cock (or hen? not enough to say exactly) on the dead guy´s body.

So, in all fairness, most of us eat chicken regularly and for that chicken need to be killed. I also despise abuse of animals but I also eat meat myself (only from biological farms in order to prevent bad animal treatment) and I have always arranged myself with this scene as I think they simply used an already dead chicken from the butcher for this last scene that would have been eaten anyway.

Could that perception be something to appease your nerves in this thread?

P.S. we all know that famous Charlie Guanci (RIP!) was the animal handler and trainer on the show, including Elvis. I doubt that he would have agreed to animal cruelty on the set?!

 

There was no fight on my end, nor need to appease my nerves.  For reasons I still can’t figure out  someone couldn’t seem to handle explanations of why some things were in this episode, and became rude and nasty...but I found it rather humorous.  

I don’t think they killed the cock nor abused any animals on the show, and your explanation of how they showed the dead cock in “Borrasca” is probably spot-on. By the 80s animal cruelty was not usually allowed, not in the U.S. anyway.

I also eat meat (as well as vegetables) but I am very much against animal abuse...or any abuse to anyone or anything. However, sadly some people and/or cultures do commit it and/or participate in it, even for sport-(referring to animals). Sometimes movies or TV will portray that for realism or for awareness. I understand that those things can be very “dark” or disturbing...but, if you can’t handle those things then it’s probably a good idea you don’t watch them.

Edited May 15, 2021 by ViceFanMan

[Cassagrande.M]

5 hours ago, fakespyder said:

I had always assumed that the dead bird was a prop (ie. not real)

Yes from watching the episode on the koch blu ray edition, it came across to me like it was indeed a fake prop. 

[wolfie1996]

6 hours ago, fakespyder said:

I had always assumed that the dead bird was a prop (ie. not real)

It looked a bit too real for my liking, fakespyder (unfortunately). You  could see bits of its skin where the feathers were disarranged.

[wolfie1996]

32 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said:

There was no fight on my end, nor need to appease my nerves.  For reasons I still can’t figure out  someone couldn’t seem to handle explanations of why some things were in this episode, and became rude and nasty...but I found it rather humorous.  

I don’t think they killed the cock nor abused any animals on the show, and your explanation of how they showed the dead cock in “Borrasca” is probably spot-on. By the 80s animal cruelty was not usually allowed, not in the U.S. anyway.

I also eat meat (as well as vegetables) but I am very much against animal abuse...or any abuse to anyone or anything. However, sadly some people and/or cultures do commit it and/or participate in it, even for sport-(referring to animals). Sometimes movies or TV will portray that for realism or for awareness. I understand that those things can be very “dark” or disturbing...but, if you can’t handle those things then it’s probably a good idea you don’t watch them.

Oh push off, can't you! You're beginning to be a complete pain in the neck about this. And  don't forget to  straighten that fake halo on the way out.

[ViceFanMan]

17 minutes ago, wolfie1996 said:

Oh push off, can't you! You're beginning to be a complete pain in the neck about this. And  don't forget to  straighten that fake halo on the way out.

There’s no halo...and you really need to calm yourself down and stop with the insults. I understand you don’t like the episode. But, there’s no need to be rude and nasty to others who have just explained why some aspects were included in the plot/script...not saying those aspects were good, just why they were there.

49 minutes ago, Cassagrande.M said:

Yes from watching the episode on the koch blu ray edition, it came across to me like it was indeed a fake prop. 

I agree, I’m sure it was. Animal protection groups and most likely even the SAG wouldn’t have allowed any animals to actually be killed or abused.

Edited May 15, 2021 by ViceFanMan

[Tom]

vor einer Stunde schrieb ViceFanMan:

There was no fight on my end, nor need to appease my nerves.  For reasons I still can’t figure out  someone couldn’t seem to handle explanations of why some things were in this episode, and became rude and nasty...but I found it rather humorous.  

I don’t think they killed the cock nor abused any animals on the show, and your explanation of how they showed the dead cock in “Borrasca” is probably spot-on. By the 80s animal cruelty was not usually allowed, not in the U.S. anyway.

I also eat meat (as well as vegetables) but I am very much against animal abuse...or any abuse to anyone or anything. However, sadly some people and/or cultures do commit it and/or participate in it, even for sport-(referring to animals). Sometimes movies or TV will portray that for realism or for awareness. I understand that those things can be very “dark” or disturbing...but, if you can’t handle those things then it’s probably a good idea you don’t watch them.

There are two people needed for an argument. Reading all this above it clearly was. Not taking sides here, but: Better stand for it instead of denying the obvious.

[ViceFanMan]

11 minutes ago, Tom said:

There are two people needed for an argument. Reading all this above it clearly was. Not taking sides here, but: Better stand for it instead of denying the obvious.

There was no argument or anything to argue over...just explanations of the episode. That’s what made the rudeness and anger on the other end ridiculous and unnecessary. No one says you have to like an episode or something included in it...but there’s no need to be insulting if others discuss the episode or those things.

Now...how about we move on to something else in the episode.  One thing I really liked in this one was the colors & pastels used at the beginning! I always loved the visuals, especially at the beginning of an episode...helped get me in the mood! 

Edited May 15, 2021 by ViceFanMan