Posted on 04/28/2006 3:15:10 PM PDT by Paddlefish
A documentary that records almost two dozen leaps from the landmark bridge has generated praise and scorn for its maker. For an entire year the cameras rolled, capturing death amid the eerie fog and shifting tides.
One by one, filmmaker Eric Steel documented the final moments of nearly two dozen despondent men and women, and the agonizing, four-second fall after they leaped off the Golden Gate Bridge, drawn by the span's tragic beauty. His intent, he says, was to illuminate "the darkest corner of the human mind." If he watched enough people take their own lives, he thought, he could "spot the outward manifestations of their interior demons."
Steel says he too once considered suicide. "It's that Humpty Dumpty moment when it's all going to fall apart," he said. "For me and many others, it didn't come. For the people in this film, it did."
His documentary, "The Bridge," which opens at a film festival in San Francisco on Sunday after debuting Thursday in New York City, has already provoked outrage. "This is like a newspaper carrying a front-page photo of someone blowing his head off; it's irresponsible, exploitative, voyeuristic, ghastly and immoral," said Mark Chaffee, president of Suicide Prevention Advocacy Network-California, who has not seen the movie. His 16-year-old son took his life in 1998.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
That's enough for me.
Wow. You're either really unlucky, or you work for the Acme Safe Co.
If everyone can use rent-seeking to prevent their particular anguish, real or imaginary to prohibit the dissemination of news, nothing could ever be reported.
I came upon a crowd and heard the mob reaction (yes, college students, who did yell "Jump"), got disgusted and walked away, around a corner of the building - then "heard" it, as I walked on to my class. I, too, hope to never again be in that situation.
The film producer was on GMA yesterday or the day before and they were going to have the one guy who survived his jump on for an interview today, I think, but I missed it. Have no idea what he had to say.
And BTW, they said on GMA that they saved 6 lives. Here's what the story says:
" ... Steel established guidelines on when to intervene, instructing the crew to call emergency officials if a pedestrian set down a bag or briefcase, removed shoes or wallet, or climbed onto the rail. They intervened five times to stop jumpers, he said. ..."
San Francisco is in a stunningly beautiful place. There's nothing quite like driving across the Golden Gate on a sunny afternoon, when the fog comes rolling back in ... whoosh. It's just the most amazing thing for this southern boy. The weather I'm accustomed to is a litte more broadstroke.
But, there is such a large population of profoundly, unapologetically disturbed people in that city. Despite the joy that I've felt from all the natural beauty, I also feel that it's an occult town, as much if not more so than New Orleans. I would not be surprised to learn that statistics on suicide would reflect a very large concentration of people killing themselves there. It's the ultimate narcissistic act of a deranged mind, and what better place is there, to feed ones' ego one last time, than the Golden Gate Bridge?
If the Golden Gate cameras had been rolling in 1970, they'd have captured the suicide leap of Evan Thomas, Valedictorian, Monte Vista High, Class of '69. His death haunts my husband, his classmate, to this day -- don't need to see it on film.
Three weeks and three hours ago today I saw my first
funnel cloud.That was enough to last me my lifetime.
About eight yrs ago I was in Nashville when a girl
jumped off the L&C Tower,that was also enough to do me
my lifetime.
ping
I wonder if they will intervene if a pedestrian sets down a bag with bungie cord, ties off to the bridge...
And most of all, its free speech. If you don't like the film or hate the concept, no one is forcing people to go or watch it. I personally think that seeing something that sobering would make me feel better about being among the living no matter how bad things were. Don't know if I could stomach a whole film on the topic, but then again I have the free will to walk out when it gets too much. Funny how that freedom thing works.
The first jump I witnessed was just plain gory. The second had an intense surreal quality to it. I would tell you more, but then again, why ruin your day.
These things do stick with you though, don't they?
Window washer or a doorman more likely...
Sad, a permanent solution to a temporary problem.
Seeing the jumpers from the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001 nearly did me in.
Another ghoulish exhibition from the Culture of Death.
"And most of all, its free speech"
_____________________________
Yes it is. And it is also "irresponsible, exploitative, voyeuristic, ghastly and immoral."
Just sounds like more "Faces of Death" type stuff.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Could you please explain what is "irresponsible" or "immoral" about this concept?
I though you might wish to express an opinion on this topic.
Santa Ana Will Be Jumping On May 1
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1623449/posts
We had some acquaitances (I never considered them friends) years ago when we were young and foolish. During that period of time as we wandered through drug and alternative lifestyles we met a lot of wackos and somehow we turned out alright. We have our parents to thank.) and I found out a couple of years ago that the man of this couple became addicted to heroin and when he jumped off the Golden Gate bridge, he tried to time it so his body would hit a sight seeing boat. Evil even in his last moments.
I too hate New Orleans and San Francisco. I've never felt those emotions about any other city. They are evil. (I've never been to Ithica - lol but since my wonderful husband was born there over 60 years ago I can't consider it a city of evil.)
It is without a doubt the most beautiful city in the US, perhaps the world. While I understand what you are saying about the people living there now, I have the advantage of remembering a beautiful city with relatively normal citizens, years ago.
That bridge has always been a misfit magnet, though.
worst thing I've even seen, even over military and police videos was the one of a woman getting hit by a commuter train.
she is walking with a man who stops short, and I guess she isn't paying attention and gets totally smashed by the front of the train. I wouldn't say I felt sick after seeing it, but I was pretty upsetting
I could perhaps understand the exploitative argument if the producer makes a buck off the deaths of others, but I have troubles excepting the irresponsible and immoral arguments. These people willingly jumped to their deaths, who exactly is the one being irresponsible or immoral? I've always been of the opinion that news outlets SHOULD show the horrors and carnage of disasters, crime, wars and famine so that the idea sinks into people that death ain't pretty and consequences can be horrible. Like the first time everyone saw those graphic reckless driving movies in highschool, the idea sticks with you (too bad they don't show those anymore). If anything, I see it as completely moral that truth be disseminated and unfiltered. All documentaries and news accounts are voyeuristic in their very nature so everyone is equally guilty in that topic.
Exactly.
So how do you feel about exploitative, voyeuristic and ghastly? I don't think fizzwig is against free speech; but free speech often trumps good taste.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Who could not be moved to indignation by the film we saw on Sep. 11, 2001?
There are horrors in life that we need to know about.
This is quite the same category as that, or as the death of Nick Berg. Many of those "opposed" are not anti-voyeur, rather they simply can't stomach the truth. A smaller percentage would actively suppress the data summarily in order to avoid political repercussions that may affect them.
"But, there is such a large population of profoundly, unapologetically disturbed people in that city. Despite the joy that I've felt from all the natural beauty, I also feel that it's an occult town, as much if not more so than New Orleans. I would not be surprised to learn that statistics on suicide would reflect a very large concentration of people killing themselves there. It's the ultimate narcissistic act of a deranged mind, and what better place is there, to feed ones' ego one last time, than the Golden Gate Bridge?"
Excellect summary.
I recall the writings of one jumper who survived, that it occurred to him on the way down that every bad problem in his life was fixable - except the one he had just created.
this can't be as image-searing as the several I've witnessed along the rr tracks over the years, all the unattached pieces, the finality of it all, the gruesome smells, etc.
This is expose, documentary evidence of a sad reality the city of San Francisco won't face.
Nobody is reaching for their pants over this but perhaps a handful of freaks who are already jail-ward bound in life.
Sounds sorta like that weird '90s indie film Man Bites Dog.
Exactly, and I'll take it a step further and say that the media in our modern age is more Orwellian than ever - and its a crying shame that so many people actually encourage this because they don't like the violence. To an extent, this is understandable but at the same time, when is graphic violence ever good viewing? ( ---Ok, outside of you UFC fans ----). Would you have felt better on 9-11 if Peter Jennings or Dan Rather had just told you about the events that had unfolded or would you have rather seen the horrible details for your self? And as you know, the media outlets that day did a great deal of self-censorship, thankfully the internet has many more clips of the events that were never broadcasted.
Pierre Salinger's son, Marc, was also a jumper in the 1970's. He was in my high school graduation class. We were both living in San Francisco at the time, but I didn't know he was there. I understand the vast majority jump on the city-side vs. the ocean-side. I was interested if that would be in the article, but it wasn't.
Some people live to tell about it.
It’s interesting that all most all jumpers jump from the east city facing side. Anyone know why?
Some say it’s a way of saying goodbye to the city. But I think it’s something else.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah - I (mildly) know what you mean. I have a friend that is a conductor on a local rail system and he has told me of the PURE TERROR of having to look into the faces of people that are on the tracks in front of his engine and knowing that they are possibly going to die and the train crew are the first people on the scene to give any help possible.
My sympathy for any that have to deal with this part of life.
From the Top of the Mark (Hopkins), especially.
Dunno - but they got that guy on the Empire State Building yesterday, didn't they? I don't mean this film crew did, lol, but *authorities.* 'Course, that was cuz his fat suit prevented him from getting over the boundary.
Me, too - and I waited more than 2 years before I allowed myself to view it.
And usually, "five minutes before the miracle."
Thanks. Insightful of him, lol.
Only The Haight and Bourbon Street, to me.
Simple. You'd have to go further out of your way to get to the ocean side, hence mostly bicycles on the ocean side. Park and walk to the bridge, you are on the city side by default. I doubt there is anything more to it than this.
Nope. But your close.
Suicide barrier missing on city side?
Either way, I'm only suggesting it is a matter of convenience and not something deep and meaningful.
Found this on a site called "Everything2.com" which elaborates on the bs psychological stuff and then on the "prgmatic" theory - which mirrors mine, save for that missed the fact that pedestrians are not allowed on the west side. So the answer is even more obvious than my original thought.
The vast majority of suicides from the Golden Gate Bridge jump from the east side of the bridge, facing the San Francisco Bay, the minor islands of Alcatraz and Angel Island, the shores and hills of Berkeley and Oakland. Why they do not dive from the west side of the bridge, stretching towards the Farallon Islands and the Pacific Ocean, is a subject of some debate.
Psychology argues that the act of suicide is directed at persons or situations at whose hands the actor has suffered, that the act is vengeful. The history that drove this person to extinguish themselves would most likely lie to the east of the Golden Gate Bridge, and therefore the diver faces east, projecting their jump as an act of vengeance. Or, as the more humanist of the chemical mechanics offer, the actor recalls some person or event that now lies to their east, and wishes to transmit their action in that direction.
There are spiritualists, however, who contend that the suicide fears to confront the trackless horizon of the sea, its intimation of the infinite, in such proximity to their Empedoclean apotheosis.
The pragmatists, those hard observers of the world and its ways, note that the western side of the bridge is reserved for bicycle traffic, pedestrians are not allowed.
If pendestrians WERE allowed on the West Side, I bet the all the jumpers would still be on the East side due to my original theory.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.