Snuff Film

Factual Questions
1

Since the Zapruder Film of Kennedy Assassination is now a record on The Internet Movie Database, can it now be considered a snuff film?

2

I believe a necessary characteristic of a snuff film is that the person killed was killed by the filmmaker for the purpose of getting the death on film. If you want to allege Zapruder’s involvement in the Kennedy assasination, well, that’s another thread.

3

Or maybe Oswald saw Zapruder with a camera and thought, “Oh good, this will get on film.”

4

Why do we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway?

5

Get some videos called ‘Mondo Cane’ they show this stuff extensively, throughly & factually.

6

Damn, and I thought this was about a documentary on smokeless tobacco.

I don’t think the Mondo Cane or Faces of Death films qualify as snuff as none of the deaths were arranged by the producers of the films.

7

Correct a Snuff Film is defined as a film which was made with the intent of killing an unsuspecting person and capturing it on video.

There are some videos you can buy with news and amature footage of deaths by disasters and mishaps, but these people did not intend to film a death. Also “Faces of death” and such have a lot or re-enacted and simulated material and it is not true footage. There is a good article on this on one of the UL sites, basically you can easily tell the faked footage by seeing multi camera angles and cuts without seeing multiple cameramen.

8

Which reminds me . . .

The cover story of the Washington Post Sunday supplement this past weekend was a story on teen and pre-teen sexuality. In the story, the writer referred to her father-in-law, who was a police officer, and mentions casually that he “used to confiscate snuff films.”

If that is indeed the case, then he (and she) knows something that Cecil doesn’t. I should e-mail her and find out just what she does know in relation to this.

9

Of course, we SDMB denizens would be remiss in not posting a link to Cecil Adams’ column.

Is there such a thing as a snuff film? (02-Jul-1993)

Short answer: probably not. Unless pldennison uncovers a smoking gun through his newspaper article.

10

BurnMeUp wrote:

The alt.folklore.urban FAQ defines a snuff film somewhat differently:

So deaths captured on film, like the Zapruder film, don’t qualify on either condition of the definition.

I think it is a pretty good definition, though arguments have been advanced that it too restrictive. Given the prevalence of video cameras, alternative snuff scenarios have been put forward:

  • Joe Sicko murders random victim and videotapes the act.

  • Snuff connoisseurs get ahold of Sicko videotape and distribute it covertly.

I think this scenario would fit most people’s definition of snuff but would fail the AFU definition. The key element in either the AFU definition or the scenario above is the conspiracy to distribute, whether for gain or not, a snuff film. That there are depraved murders is not really legendary, it is the conspiracy that elevates into ULhood.

pldennison wrote:

Hmm, it is not quite clear what is being alleged here. Snuff films as in genuine film records of real murders? Snuff films as in the various faux snuff films? Just confiscated, not investigated?

Andrew Warinner

11

pldennison,

I, for one, would be very interested to know the results of your inquiry. Please share.