I like the concept of viral videos, but there's been so many of them of lately, mostly from companies looking for a "big bang" with little cash outlay, that I think the genre is getting stale very quickly.

Here's the latest one making the rounds, along with some reporter's observations about it:

Viral Wedding Video

I live on the Edge of Nowhere on the Oregon coast where we can't get high-speed Internet access, so I haven't watched the whole thing, but I did see a clip of it on one of the Portland TV news shows. One thing which occurred to me which the reporter didn't mention is that it appears to have been shot with at least two cameras. That suggest to me that it was staged. It doesn't prove it, but it increases the likelihood that the video was planned rather being a case of someone just happening to catch this accident on tape. If this is a fake, I don't know what it's promoting, but that may come out in the fullness of time (ooh, fancy language!)

Posted on Mon Oct 20, 2008


I vote staged. Reactions seem contrived.
Posted by Joe Bogus  on  Mon Oct 20, 2008  at  05:52 PM
I'm not sure what's so fascinating about these things. It seems like a pretty lame stunt to be a fake, it's barely interesting if it's real.
Posted by bb  on  Mon Oct 20, 2008  at  06:42 PM
The web address given doesn't seem to exist.
Posted by Sharruma  in  capable of finishing a coherent  on  Mon Oct 20, 2008  at  09:43 PM
Interesting that 103 (!) character address acually links to a local new channel here. I was surprised.

I have to say, it could go either way; the initial trip looks fake, perhaps even planned... That is until you look at the foot of the BM as he steps up.

Then watch the bride.. Her excited nervous sway; she looks like a girl actually getting married to me.

I don't see a break-away that would lead me to believe is was 2 cameras though, perhaps the Portland station edited the clip, but the original looks smooth.

I have videoed weddings before, I say real or very well stagged leaning to real..
Posted by Tim  on  Mon Oct 20, 2008  at  11:48 PM
I lean towards real for this one. The slip of his foot seems very genuine and happens on a place where this is likely to happen.
Posted by LaMa  in  Europe  on  Tue Oct 21, 2008  at  05:02 AM
Fake. No one says "Oh, sh--!"? Not one person?
Posted by Sam Janulewicz  on  Tue Oct 21, 2008  at  06:19 AM
It doesn't look to me like it was shot with 2 cameras. It could very well be real. I'm leaning towards fake because the camera work seems very planned out (the zooming in and out and steadiness of the camera while the bride falls into the water) and the reactions also seem pretty fake. No one cusses. I mean come on. You'd get a couple "SH*T! WTF!" reactions.
Posted by alexk  on  Tue Oct 21, 2008  at  06:44 AM
I didn't see the 2 camera thing...

I have never been to a wedding where the bride and groom weren't holding hands...or where they were standing so far apart (due to the hand-holding they were just a few inches apart). I don't know any priest that would wear sunglasses at such a serious moment...even if the wedding were outside. I would think eye contact is important.

Could be fake. Could be real...but if the person filming was the photographer...why would he risk losing his business by showing this? It would have to be a cell phone or personal camera that would had to have done it. I don't know how to tell the difference, but the zooming was VERY nice. It appeared to be an optical, rather than digital zoom.
Posted by Maegan  in  Tampa, FL - USA  on  Tue Oct 21, 2008  at  07:52 AM
This looks very fake and I am surprised people think its real. Yes the trip is pretty good but nobody reacts by bending down the way people react instinctively when someone trips near them. The best man grabbing at the bride's ankles was not well done. The fall of bride and minister are the most fake and the obvious give away. No one falls accidentally that straight. You people have heard of acting haven't you?
Posted by floormaster squeeze  on  Tue Oct 21, 2008  at  08:15 AM
This is a tough one, could be real or fake.

1) I don' see a second camera, but looking at the locaition, it wouldn't necessarily be all that strange to have more than one camer filming the wedding after all

2) When the best man slips, he actually tries to catch himself by quickly moving his left foot up o the step (which also slips). This is very instinctive and natural, and not something that I would expect when being faked. Which just might mean they are good fakers! I've taken acting classes, and the way he falls really doesn't seem faked. Of course, if they were determined to make this real-looking, they could always have lubricated the step allowing him to really slip and fall. The soles of men's dress shoes, especially new (and cheap!) ones, do tend to be quite slipery.

3) People who are focused on something actually tend not to react quickly. A lot of people will freeze up in such a situation. Deer-in-Headlight syndrome is quite real when something like this happens that is completely out of context. The Groom, being close naturally reacts, but others would likely be "stunned" while they process what happened.

4) I've seen priests wear sunglasses at outdoor weddings. Anyone with blue eyes can tell you just how painful the sun can be wihout them. I actually have great difficulty just being outside in bright sunshine without shades. As for holding hands, I've seen weddings done both ways, just a matter of the local or church custom I guess.

Hard to call on this one. It wouldn't surprise me if it turned out to be real. If it is a fake, I suppose it'll end up selling non-slip footwear, or some sort of non-slip coating for exterior walkways, hehe. If it is real, they re very lucky that it was a sheer drop-off to the pool, they don't seem to be injured.
Posted by Transfrmr  in  deep trouble  on  Tue Oct 21, 2008  at  08:58 AM
I have blue eyes...I know how harsh the sun can be. But at a wedding?? Oh well. Local customs or traditions and whatnot.
Posted by Maegan  in  Tampa, FL - USA  on  Tue Oct 21, 2008  at  09:14 AM
I would vote fake, based on the camera work. If it was a professional wedding videographer, he would not have been using the zoom like that during the ceremony. If it was a friend doing the taping, then, like most people, they probably would have stopped taping and put the camera down. Almost all the time when you see clips on the internet of things going wrong, you don't see the aftermath. For some reason, people tend to stop recording.

It's pretty flimsy evidence, but that's my 2 cents worth.
Posted by AqueousBoy  on  Tue Oct 21, 2008  at  10:52 AM
If it's viral, what the heck are they selling?

Non-slip tape? Water purifiers? Dunking insurance?

Shouldn't a viral video give you a clue as to what you're being infected with?
Posted by Robert G.  on  Tue Oct 21, 2008  at  11:32 AM
"Shouldn't a viral video give you a clue as to what you're being infected with?"

Yeah, you'd think so but sometimes, the advertiser waits until the "viral" video gets a gadzillion hits before revealing what it's for. We'll see.

As for the "multiple camera" thing, I said that based on the few seconds of the video I saw on the local TV news. The camera position jumped but that could easily have been a result of the news show having edited out where you actually saw the person holding a single camera move.

You guys have seen more of the total than I have so I'll accept your judgment that it doesn't look like a multi-camera shoot.
Posted by Cranky Media Guy  on  Tue Oct 21, 2008  at  05:11 PM
It may not even be a "viral" video. Lots of people make funny videos just for the hell of it.
Posted by AqueousBoy  on  Wed Oct 22, 2008  at  11:46 AM
VIRAL does not mean it contains a virus, nor that it is trying to sell something..

It is, quite simply a video clip that gains widespread popularity through the process of Internet sharing.

i.e. it spreads like a virus. You are infected with the enjoyment and tell others about it, they see it & enjoy it, then the whole thing repeats.
Posted by Tim  on  Wed Oct 22, 2008  at  04:03 PM
Thanks for making a point that I intended to make but forgot about, Tim.

Lately it seems that most "viral" stuff is promoting something but not ALL viral media has a commercial basis.
Posted by Cranky Media Guy  on  Wed Oct 22, 2008  at  07:03 PM
I say real and I see only one camera. It looks too bland and undramatic to be faked. Another clue is the way the best man tripped--his attempts to catch himself look natural, if this was a stunt, he wouldn't have bothered. There is also a complete lack of anticipation on part of the participants. (I majored in film and produced several educational videos. One thing I've long observed is that amateur, and even professional actors, tend to anticipate each other's lines and actions.)
Posted by Joe  on  Thu Oct 23, 2008  at  10:52 PM
The sun is harsher for people with blue eyes??
Posted by Razela  in  Chicago, IL  on  Sun Oct 26, 2008  at  05:29 PM
It could be very well really. I sklonnyayus' to the fake, because work of chamber seems very planned.
Posted by Viktor  on  Mon Mar 30, 2009  at  05:59 AM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.