How much is too much prank?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rutherford2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rutherford2

Guest
It has come to my attention that more and more people are making pranks that could even give their victims a REAL heart attack. For example this:


The victims thought they were real demonic forces and even prayed to God and Mary for help unceasingly not knowing it is only a prank. What’s worse is that viewers enjoyed looking at the sufferings of these people. They get “entertained” from the expense of these poor people’s lives. The more they screamed the more the viewers love it. Oh, what a world we live in today! I know it is only a prank but has they gone overboard a little? Is this a little too much? What do you think?
 
I think one of the cruelest pranks is the phony lottery ticket.
To give a person the hope that some of their financial woes will go away only to pull the rug out from under them?
Ugly
 
My hard and fast rule?

A good prank is one where the victim will be laughing along with you within 5 minutes after it’s over.

Everything else? It’s simple egotistical sadism.
 
The video linked is the Brazilian version of ‘Candid Camera’ pranks. They call the format ‘pegadinha’ which means ‘getting caught’ in diminutive.

Mostly I think it’s in poor taste, and it’s made for a south American audience that thrives on popular culture. The show coming next would probably be criminals arrested a few minutes earlier and brought to the police station being forcibly put in front of the cameras for all to see - in whatever state and shape you may care to imagine, from the guy that just committed murder an hour ago to everything else.

The second largest TV network in the country is owned by a questionable evangelical church called IURD. [They actually built a replica of Salmon’s temple in the center of São Paulo.]

The largest TV network in the country is also the second largest in the world and had a highly successful game show that would make a poor person rich or have them leave empty handed, for and entire poverty ridden nation to see - like your lotto ticket example. [a 50% ratings share sells soaps and presidents.]
 
Last edited:
Hey how’s it going? I’ve been away a bit of a time. Anything new to report?
 
Last edited:
I think once people are outwardly showing signs they are afraid and becoming frantic to escape, the pranksters need to stop the “joke” from going further. I know some people will claim “it’s just a joke, just a prank.” But that’s because it isn’t happening to them. It’s just cruel.
 
I prefer prank shows like the Carbonaro Effect. In that one he’s a magician who pulls magic tricks on unsuspecting people.

And while he does end up scaring people every now and then, they laugh with him afterwards.

Prank shows where the pranks aren’t innocent aren’t my style.
 
I wonder how Jesus and Mary would reacted since the prank victims already sincerely prayed ouy loud for their help.
 
I think pranks are mostly for the benefit of the prankster and any audience at the time, I don’t think the prankster thinks too much about benefiting the victim. I’ve found that pranksters often don’t like pranks to be played on them, the reasons why tell you a lot about the pranksters underlying motives.

And speaking of victim I’m against jokes where there is a clear victim too. I realise slapstick is mostly funny because there is a victim but there are limits.

Humour can be a very useful and powerful tool but like most things it can be used for good or ill. I’ve seen it used for subversion, or perhaps that subversion is an unintentional result, sometimes it’s like sugar making poison more palatable.
 
Last edited:
Pranks can be harmless in their intent but all too often are used by people with sadistic and bullying tendencies.

Same thing with jokes and teasing. When the target expresses dismay, they are often accused of having no sense of humor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top