what's the deal with the blood? - The Getaway (1972) Discussion

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] DM-DAAN 16 years ago

This movie is from '72 and the Hays Code had just been abolished a couple of years earlier. Moviemakers weren't allowed to show blood in movies before that so they probably didn't have that much experience with blood-effects in movies yet.

Hays Code:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production_Code

reply

[–] yuma310 15 years ago

This movie is from '72 and the Hays Code had just been abolished a couple of years earlier. Moviemakers weren't allowed to show blood in movies before that so they probably didn't have that much experience with blood-effects in movies yet.

This is poopoo. I just watched The Killing (1956; the Hays code was in effect from 1930-1968) and there was a fair amount of blood in it.

reply

[–] Jd_100 16 years ago

Yet it's better than the crude oil style blood in films now a days.

Buy the ticket take the ride

reply

[–] willerror 16 years ago

You don't see good fake blood until the later on in the '70s. THE GODFATHER has some decent fake blood in Sonny's death scene, but I think it was really TAXI DRIVER where the FX people (Dick Smith in that case, IIRC) finally got it right.

reply

[–] melrod43 16 years ago

I worry about people wanting the "real" blood look in movies. Yes, its more realistic, but a society that just wants violence, real violence is a scary little world. The Getaway was a great movie--let's leave it at that already.

reply

[–] cdwillis 16 years ago

I think the point here is that the fake blood detracts from the suspension of disbelief in the movie.

I'm gonna eat your brains and gain your knowledge.

reply

[–] FinnurE 16 years ago

Movies of the 70's almost never have realistic blood, it's usually too lightly toned.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=5184666

reply

[–] Mr_McLaurel 16 years ago

The funny thing is that anyone who's ever seen real blood knows that it DOES have bright-red color, nothing like dark oily stuff in movies like No Country for Old Men. I cut my finger on a paper slicer in high school and was stunned by how "fake" the blood coming out of me looked.

What's the Spanish for drunken bum?

reply

[–] Blaff84 15 years ago

Blood vary in colour/brightness depending on where in the vessel system it flows. Your fingers contain arteries.

Arteries = Bright colour (due to high oxygen-levels)
Veins = Dark colour (due to low oxygen-levels)

reply

[–] meguroutsubo 8 years ago

I'm guessing they wanted to make sure that the blood showed up on screen. A lot of these films were using location shoots and didn't have studio lighting overhead, so they wanted bright red blood that would be obvious, even if it seems too fake after repeat viewings.

reply

[–] johnmiller (3964) 7 years ago

Dick Smith! The greatest Make-Up Artist of all time! Yeah, having Smith on board is going to definitely make a difference.

reply

[–] crayford548 15 years ago

HaHaHa! I just watched this film, looked on IMDB to see comments and this was the first one I thought it was really amusing because the blood WAS ridiculous!

It wasn't just bright red but it looked really thick in consistincy, I'm sure in one scene in the motel hallway a 'peice' of strawberry-red blood drops off the bad guy's collar. It is a little distracting from the seriousness, violence and realism when its this stupid.

Worst. Red. Blood. Ever.

reply

[–] jmalmsten 15 years ago

while I too always reacted to the brightly colored blood of 70's movies I have also noticed another thing. That red-wine (having almost the same color as blood) tend to get almost pink in the same movies. So I'll conclude that it's actually a matter of them having the set lit so bright (to get sufficient DoF on the slow anamorphic lenses they used) that any color will come out a tad to bright.

And being a frequent nose-bleeder, and son of a cattle-farmer, I too have regular run ins with running blood. And it comes in degrees alltheway from almost pink to borderline black. But most often the real dark is when it has started to coagulate when in contact with air. So fresh blood can be very bright.

And, the dark blood of todays movies is also a product of trying to get a lower rating from the MPAA. Using arguments that it's not as horrific for kids if it's so black you cannot almost see it and mostly blends into the shadows.

Someone also mentioned that the blood seemed too thick and to that I can only point out that most of the blod-squirts where in slow-motion (it's a Peckinpah-movie after all) and any liquid looks thicker when in slow-motion. like in this extreme example from the swedish exploitation-flick Thriller: A Cruel Picture... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evEQGiYKkRQ

I'm not going to say as Dean Learner that "if you're looking at the wires you aren't paying attention to the big picture". But I'll just leave it with a simple "Peckinpah did it waaaay better than his contemporaries of the day" and that counts for something right? ;)

reply

[–] MarwoodWalks 15 years ago

"Peckinpah did it waaaay better than his contemporaries of the day"

Absolutely right jmalmsten, couldnt have said it better myself. Peckinpah rocks.

"Now, Dance Sucka"

reply

[–] Xeokym 15 years ago

I worry about people wanting the "real" blood look in movies. Yes, its more realistic, but a society that just wants violence, real violence is a scary little world. The Getaway was a great movie--let's leave it at that already.

Ha ha ha ha, oh come ON! You like this movie - which is violent - and yet you're actually against a "society that just wants violence?!" People watch violent movies in place of actually partaking in it. I think violent movies, video games, etc. are an excellent outlet for violent tendencies and actually help prevent people from acting it out, not the opposite.

Movies are works of art, and no one should be able to tell what someone can or cannot put into their own movies. Violence is in our nature as human beings. Some of us are less so, some of us more so, but the fact is, without violence being a big part of our nature, we never would have evolved into the beings we are today.

¸«¤º°»«ëÕ|{¥(V)°º¤»¸
I can't understand your crazy moon language.

reply

[–] Al_Scarface_Capone 14 years ago

If you thought this was bad, watch Bullitt. The one seen of bloody violence in the beginning, the blood is ridiculously fake.

Although I will agree with the person who mentioned The Killing. The blood there is pretty good. Actually, I am surprised with what it got away with do to the Hay's code.

"You gonna bark all day little doggie, or are you gonna bite?"

reply

[–] Bogart91 14 years ago

I like the red paint blood. I think its stylistically better and looks better. In my opinion film is all about visuals and what made
Sam Peckinpah so amazing to me was he combined stylish visuals entertaining action and fantastic story telling. He is one of the best if not the best action directors of all time. He made great story's and was able to build the action around a great story not write some lame crap to try write a story to fit the action.

I HAVE TO RETURN SOME VIDEOTAPES

reply

[–] ryderdvs 13 years ago

The stage blood in THE FRENCH CONNECTION (1971) suffers from the same problem.

reply

[–] teamgomez99 13 years ago

thank you. and these people aren't very familiar with 70;s cinema. that is what the blood looks like the majority of the time (sisters '73, the french connection '71, suspiria '73, straw dogs '71, which is also a peckinpah film) i have a dvd collection of over films, a large majority pre 1990's. i like that look. and letting something completley irrelevent like the look of the blood in a Sam Peckinpah movie is just silly. focus on the important things.

"little tarts, they love it!"

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] plexus61 11 years ago

That's a fault of digital transfer. They oversaturate old movies making (particularly) "blood" looking ridiculous. Just reduce saturation (and sometimes contrast) a bit.

reply