I was about an hour into this and had to shut it off - its preposterous!!!! I could see playing along with the "police officer" in the beginning - but by this point, again, an hour into the film - there is no one, not even on planet earth, stupid enough to not be able to see that there is some kind of BS going on with the officer. If anyone disagrees with me Id love to hear an alternative opinion.
share[deleted]
I had the same reaction as the OP until I learned all the events happened almost exactly as portrayed in the film. I had much more of an appreciation for the film once I learned this.
These characters are either extremely stupid or ingenious. Imagine if this was a well-crafted con by all involved to scam McDonalds out of millions of dollars.
I know it wasn't, it was blatant stupidity resulting in millions paid in damages, but in hind sight , what an ingenious idea for a con.
The fact that some missed the film's opening announcement that what followed was based on true events and had not been exaggerated is worrying because it displays the same lack of attention to detail as was shown by Sandra throughout.
The fact that some consider the behaviour of the characters, and hence their real life counterparts, as preposterous and believe they would act otherwise is worrying because it shows a lack of awareness of what people are capable of doing when confronted by a bullying or brutal authority.
The same types of bullying and brutal authority creates dictatorships and commit genocides or ethical cleansing. These things are not preposterous.
Did you say my eyes or thighs are beautiful?share
The fact that some missed the film's opening announcement that what followed was based on true events and had not been exaggerated is worrying because it displays the same lack of attention to detail as was shown by Sandra throughout...
Really? That's what worries you?Lack of attention to the detail in life is a worry and is what most politicians rely upon. From what you've written you minimise attention to detail and the 'truth' of the matter, i.e. what is there to be perceived, with a judgement about what is there to be perceived, which, from your tone, you consider more significant. This is a good example of what is wrong with most people.
Lack of attention to detail is one thing, but it should not have taken much attention more so than reasoning ability to realize the requests were outrageous. I don't care how many true stories it was based on, those people were clearly not wrapped too tight. Insane asylums are full of those types
The distance is nothing. The first step is the hardest.share
Don't be ridiculous; I know your initial remark was not about the characters. How in the world could I have missed that when it is so obvious that you were chastising the viewers who for whatever reason didn't know the movie was based on a true story for being like the characters criticized? Frankly, if that was the conclusion you came to based on my post, I'm starting to question your attention to detail so I'm sure you'll be delighted to find yourself lumped into the category of what you consider "a good example of what is wrong with most people".
Since you missed it the first time, I am clearly stating that every event does not require attention to detail. That is not the same thing as stating no events require attention to detail. Realizing that phone call was out of line did not require attention to detail or even advanced critical thinking skills but just a little common sense.
I am also stating that the actions of the characters who did not have enough neurons firing to realize when that call had flown completely off the tracks are not in anyway similar to someone missing the opening lines of a movie. Please don't be this slow. If you get home and your house is on fire, do you really think it requires attention to detail to know there's a problem?
Your reply is disingenuous because your analogy is not a like-for-like situation. My reply to you was a response to your dismissive attitude regarding attention to detail. Without analysising every 'event' I cannot agree with you that they do not require more attention to detail. And don't presume this is an invitation for a protracted debate where you suggest to me 'events', though events is not the right word ASAIC but situations, to debate the issue of 'more or less attention to detail'. It is lack of attention to detail, as exhibited by your poor analogy, that has created societies of thoughtless people ruled by politicians and bureaucrats who manipulate their thoughtlessness and stir emotional reactivity to further reduce thought and authentic feelings. The latter you evidenced in your first reply to me and remarks such as
the actions of the characters who did not have enough neurons.
The distance is nothing. The first step is the hardest.share
This is all you could come up with?
OK, well let's go. Your reply was disingenuous because you stated that you pointed out deficiencies in my criticism when you actually just poorly surmised my motivation. Again pot, kettle.
This is not an episode of What Would You Do. I have some empathy for the restaurant manager being under pressure, but I can tell you with complete certainty that I would not strip search a co-worker. I can also tell you with complete certainty that I would not lay her across my lap and spank her with or without clothes. (Granted he did not work there but whatever.)
What is rattling around upstairs that makes this so difficult for you to grasp? I think you're deliberately being obtuse or you're just nuts yourself because this seems like the type of conversation I'd have with the caller if I chose to stay on the line albeit briefly. At least I'm in a state of mind that alerts me when I may not know for sure based on a miniscule number of posts how far off the chain another person may be, but I certainly wouldn't let them tell me what to do to another person.
You seem to be taking this STUPID behavior by those characters quite personaly? Did you get taken by a Nigerian scam or something?
[deleted]
Im the one that started this thread and Im with you Khazmir (LZ fan???). Clearly not wrapped too tight is a pretty accurate description - Id add to that - a bunch of complete idiots!!! It is still hard for me to believe that anyone that was born with a brain would fall for such BS. Like i said earlier in this thread - I obviously overestimated humanity.
shareYes a fan
It is difficult to believe anyone in their right mind would go along with that much BS. I acknowledge some people are not in their right minds, and those characters obviously weren't since it's based on a whole set of true stories. It has been said before that a sucker is born every minute, but if that much dumbness congregated in one location is considered the norm, then we've got problems.
It is incredible but true. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strip_search_prank_call_scam#Mount_Washin gton.2C_Kentucky.2C_incident
shareAnd its precisely your kind of attitude ("They are complete idiots, I would never be so stupid") that stories like the one in this film highlight. You think you're superior because you have the benefit of observing the situation from a comfortable distance. The fact is, you're not as special as you think you are. We're all fallible and it's the smug complacency such as you exhibit that serves to give birth to such scenarios.
~.~
I WANT THE TRUTH! http://www.imdb.com/list/ze4EduNaQ-s/
And its precisely your kind of attitude ("They are complete idiots, I would never be so stupid") that stories like the one in this film highlight. You think you're superior because you have the benefit of observing the situation from a comfortable distance. The fact is, you're not as special as you think you are. We're all fallible and it's the smug complacency such as you exhibit that serves to give birth to such scenarios.
Weak attempt at deflection. Pointing out the deficiency in your criticism does not preclude me from making a criticism of my own.
~.~
I WANT THE TRUTH! http://www.imdb.com/list/ze4EduNaQ-s/
Oh please, weaker attempt at pointing out a deficiency in my criticism. Did you actually re-read that drivel you wrote?
You seem mighty comfortable sitting on your tuchus drawing a whole set of inaccurate conclusions about my attitude. Given what a bad job you did with what you stated you attempted to do, I do not find it surprising that you cannot comprehend what was so preposterous about the characters' actions.
I feel comfortable, too. And you're ranting, you should exercise some of that avowed self-possession. Repeat after me:
I am an island of calm in a turbulent sea. I am an island of calm in a turbulent sea. I am an island of calm in a turbulent sea...
Ranting about what? There's nothing to rant about.
You are the one who took issue, however misguided, with my saying the characters behaved badly.I still feel the same way. The only additions to the conversation are that it's likely you would have behaved the same way as well and if you did, you'd try to defend it with your twisted view of normal.
If you consider what I've said a rant, then you're a lightweight.
You are the one who took issue, however misguided, with my saying the characters behaved badly.
it's likely you would have behaved the same way as well and if you did, you'd try to defend it with your twisted view of normal.
If you consider what I've said a rant, then you're a lightweight.
yep: dumb.
shareI know its so stupid, like a cop would force you to spank someone, like a voice on the end of the phone could force you to give someone oral sex.
True story people! Here's a video with the actual surveillance footage and interviews with the actual morons of the story: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFXeXK3szOk and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuH3GYmSjzU
shareI'm wondering why McDonald's is really at fault here (in the real life event).
Yeah, I know that they're legally responsible, but christ, the manager is 100% at fault here. And her pervert boyfriend - yeah, like he didn't know what was going on, but went for it anyway.
What is wrong with people?
That poor girl.
I agree 100%. The persons managing that shop should never be in a management position for they are simply too ignorant of the law.
***So I've seen 4 movies/wk in theatre for a 1/4 century, call me crazy?**
I'm not sure what Poppy, khazmir and Assets are all fighting about here... Sheesh, calm down (does that sound familiar)?
I think everyone to some extent is agreeing with one another. Yes, the manager in this case was an incredible dumb***. We all agree! But I think the reaction to the so-called "preposterousness" of a 100% true story tells us something. I reacted the same way, thinking to myself "this may be based on a true story, but they had to use some dramatic license to make it more interesting and they are going way over the top..." But nope, like OP, I freely admit to being a dumb*** myself for not realizing something so preposterous could have actually happened.
Would anyone fall for this hoax? Of course not. An educated person with some amount of life experience would know the police do not operate this way. There must have been some fast-food managers who hung up on the guy and reported the hoax (this is the premise of the lawsuits--McDonalds knew about the hoaxes and failed to adequately alert their employees). But that's what the caller is counting on, doing this enough times that he comes upon just the right mix of personalities to pull it off and in the Louise Ogborn case, he hit the jackpot. Stressed and not too bright manager, obedient, naive teenaged employee, sleazy/really incredibly stupid fiance. The point is, someone did fall for it, and we smart people didn't even believe it could happen. And that's Poppy's and Assets' point. You don't believe people can be idiots and do horrible things? History has proven it over and over again. Right here in the Louise Ogborn case, in genocides and lynchings--and many other examples. Before even reading any of these posts, this movie was making me think about the kind of ignorance and mob mentality that causes normal, decent people to do unthinkable things. So, Poppy and Assets, I get what you're saying.
I think you do up to a point. The point was exactly about "the kind of ignorance and mob mentality that causes normal, decent people to do unthinkable things," just like you said.
But you also divide people in these grossly different categories: "the manager in this case was an incredible dumb***" / "we smart people didn't even believe it could happen".
I think the point that was being made was that it's easy to say something is dumb when you're watching from afar. But the Milgram experiment convinced me that even when you think you are a good and intelligent person, and that you would never do anything horrible to a human being, and that we're all better than that (except from some dumb*** stupid horrible people that have nothing to do with you and me), might be overestimating how strong of a person you are. I would like to believe that in such circumstances (like the Milgram experiment), I would challenge authority and not take any part in something I might consider to be morally wrong.
Having said this, I realise I may be wrong. All of us think this until it happens. We can't be strong people all the time, and is it so surprising that this story took place on a very stressful day for everybody involved (not having called the regional manager about the food problem, busy Friday with no bacon, the girl thinking she was suspected about the freezer thing and worried about her job).
So for me, this movie was not that much about "look at how bumb some people can be" but more about "look at what terrible things we may be capable of taking part in when we just follow orders". Here it was a con pretending to be a cop. If it was a real cop, would it have been ok for them to do what they did? I know when something like this happens to me and when I need to decide whether to do what I'm told or disagree and face the consequences, it's probably going to be a completely different situation, and it might or might not be a con on the other end of the line; I hope we can act like the normal decent persons we are rather than betray ourselves while doing what we're told.
It took you an hour? I turned it off after 10 mins. Someone phones up purporting to be a police officer and asks for a member of staff to be detained. The manager doesn't ask for proof nor call the station to confirm?
I know these are supposed to be Americans but surely even they aren't that dumb?