Paul Walker Dies in Car Accident

[TheFeniX]

I haven't watched Goodfellas and Casino in a while so I'll take your word on some of the specifcs here. But if any defense could be offered, it's that these characters must feel this way, that's how their minds work. That doesn't mean that the work must show them in a flattering light, especially not like F&F.

The ending of Casino was like the fall of Rome. Vegas is shit now that the mafia is gone. There is no other perspective offered. Ace doesn't reflect on how life might be better outside the mob. The whole of both movies seems to be "The Mob does things this way for a reason. We thought we knew better and it cost us everything." It's almost like some 1984 shtick.

Was the brutality and evil shown? Were the consequences of their actions? I mean, there's a scene in the Sopranos where a mafioso (si?) complains that "it's over for the little guy" because the corporations took over and they can't extort businesses anymore, but I don't think that any (sane) viewer took it seriously. It was what it appeared to be: self-serving bullshit because we knew how terrible they were.

Joe Pesci is like a rabid dog, but he's the "good guy's" rabid dog. His violence, narcissism, and general insanity is perfectly acceptable up to the point where it isn't. And the movies don't go out of the way to tell you this is bad.

IF Goodfellas and Casino did the same, then the characters can say whatever the fuck they like about how awesome their lives were, WE'LL know that they're bad. As I recall they were psychotic bastards there too, Pesci shot a kid then killed him and everyone put up with his insanity until he crossed one line, not sure that this reflects well on them.

The line was that he killed a Made Man. That was it. It's terrible that he was killed, according to the narration, not that a brutal murderer was murdered. In Casino, he was blamed for the fall of the mafia in Vegas. He also nailed Ace's wife which was a big no-no. His death was personal to a side character, but to the rest and the audience, it was just business.

Escape or success doesn't always equal glorification.

Exactly. But Liotta's character's fall was because he fucked up a good thing, not because "crime doesn't pay." He was told specifically to stay out of coke by the Boss, and he ignored him to make more money. Then he got everyone else involved and fucked everything up. He had to sell everyone out because he gave up on "good mafia values" and paid the price.

Neither movie presents this from any perspective other than that of a mobster. There's no comeuppance because they are "bad men." The comeuppance is because they fucked up their job as murdering psychopaths. Ace is the only main character in either movie who stayed on the path and he made it out in the end. Both movies make sure you know that "everything is better when the Mafia is in charge."

[Grumman]

I would tell them that because I believe responsible people are capable of distinguishing fiction from reality. If they are not capable of doing that it's because they are irresponsible and/or completely mentally deficient, not because of the fiction they happen to consume. If I were to blame their irresponsible actions on the fiction they consume I don't see how I'd be different from the people who blame school massacres on videogames or the Aurora shooting on Christopher Nolan's Batman movies.

Well said. I might play games about running a gang and watch movies about vigilantes, but a mentally healthy adult must be capable of distinguishing between fiction and reality.

That said, I do know where Stas Bush is coming from. I think Zero Dark Thirty goes too far by insinuating that torture helped capture Bin Laden in a film that is purportedly the true story (made with the assistance of the CIA, no less!), and I do have a problem with Fifty Shades of Grey whitewashing abuse by calling it BDSM.

[Scrib]

I haven't watched Goodfellas and Casino in a while so I'll take your word on some of the specifcs here. But if any defense could be offered, it's that these characters must feel this way, that's how their minds work. That doesn't mean that the work must show them in a flattering light, especially not like F&F.

The ending of Casino was like the fall of Rome. Vegas is shit now that the mafia is gone. There is no other perspective offered. Ace doesn't reflect on how life might be better outside the mob. The whole of both movies seems to be "The Mob does things this way for a reason. We thought we knew better and it cost us everything." It's almost like some 1984 shtick.

Was the brutality and evil shown? Were the consequences of their actions? I mean, there's a scene in the Sopranos where a mafioso (si?) complains that "it's over for the little guy" because the corporations took over and they can't extort businesses anymore, but I don't think that any (sane) viewer took it seriously. It was what it appeared to be: self-serving bullshit because we knew how terrible they were.

Joe Pesci is like a rabid dog, but he's the "good guy's" rabid dog. His violence, narcissism, and general insanity is perfectly acceptable up to the point where it isn't. And the movies don't go out of the way to tell you this is bad.

IF Goodfellas and Casino did the same, then the characters can say whatever the fuck they like about how awesome their lives were, WE'LL know that they're bad. As I recall they were psychotic bastards there too, Pesci shot a kid then killed him and everyone put up with his insanity until he crossed one line, not sure that this reflects well on them.

The line was that he killed a Made Man. That was it. It's terrible that he was killed, according to the narration, not that a brutal murderer was murdered. In Casino, he was blamed for the fall of the mafia in Vegas. He also nailed Ace's wife which was a big no-no. His death was personal to a side character, but to the rest and the audience, it was just business.

Escape or success doesn't always equal glorification.

Exactly. But Liotta's character's fall was because he fucked up a good thing, not because "crime doesn't pay." He was told specifically to stay out of coke by the Boss, and he ignored him to make more money. Then he got everyone else involved and fucked everything up. He had to sell everyone out because he gave up on "good mafia values" and paid the price.

Neither movie presents this from any perspective other than that of a mobster. There's no comeuppance because they are "bad men." The comeuppance is because they fucked up their job as murdering psychopaths. Ace is the only main character in either movie who stayed on the path and he made it out in the end. Both movies make sure you know that "everything is better when the Mafia is in charge."

I'm more sympathetic to the argument about perspectives than the one about karma.Ace and his friends being nostalgic is to be expected,also mobsters dying because they ignore the rules of an organization dedicated to making violence and crime profitable is reasonable but if the director wanted us to take it with a grain of salt and he didn't make this clear throughout the film with either differing perspectives or through their actions he failed. If there weren't enough scenes showing the victims and problems there should have been and to me that's more important than actually seeing the baddie go down. As long as the set of consequences they face are shown, and we see the consequences of their actions that takes it out of the realm of glorification to me, the karma is just the cherry on top. It may not be as strong a morality tale as it could have been but I don't always want movies to work that way tbh, I'd just rather they not be manipulative in the other direction.

To go back to the Sopranos example:Tony Soprano could have beaten his enemies, saved his family and kicked his feet up and read a magazine as he enjoyed his peace in the final scene of the show and I would not consider it glorification. Nothing that happens to him, no matter how good, can erase the mountains of evidence we have of his evil. It's just not happening, so he can fuck as many strippers as he likes, be as big an alpha male as possible, we know he's shit. That's all that's needed.

[JLTucker]

To go back to the Sopranos example:Tony Soprano could have beaten his enemies, saved his family and kicked his feet up and read a magazine as he enjoyed his peace in the final scene of the show and I would not consider it glorification. Nothing that happens to him, no matter how good, can erase the mountains of evidence we have of his evil. It's just not happening, so he can fuck as many strippers as he likes, be as big an alpha male as possible, we know he's shit. That's all that's needed.

It does't help that David Chase had him killed in the final scene. You know this guy you rooted for for almost decade? Well, he's a piece of shit and his brains are all over the onion rings.

[Scrib]

To go back to the Sopranos example:Tony Soprano could have beaten his enemies, saved his family and kicked his feet up and read a magazine as he enjoyed his peace in the final scene of the show and I would not consider it glorification. Nothing that happens to him, no matter how good, can erase the mountains of evidence we have of his evil. It's just not happening, so he can fuck as many strippers as he likes, be as big an alpha male as possible, we know he's shit. That's all that's needed.

It does't help that David Chase had him killed in the final scene. You know this guy you rooted for for almost decade? Well, he's a piece of shit and his brains are all over the onion rings.

David Chase was apparently a bit pissed that people kept asking him if Tony was dead for that very reason. The hypocrisy of following Tony for years only to turn around and demand his death as some sort of collective cleansing exercise apparently got to him.

Not sure why it "doesn't help" though?

[JLTucker]

It does't help that David Chase had him killed in the final scene. You know this guy you rooted for for almost decade? Well, he's a piece of shit and his brains are all over the onion rings.

David Chase was apparently a bit pissed that people kept asking him if Tony was dead for that very reason. The hypocrisy of following Tony for years only to turn around and demand his death as some sort of collective cleansing exercise apparently got to him.

Not sure why it "doesn't help" though?[/quote]
Whoops. I misused the phrase. But yeah, Chase did say that. That happened to me too. I supported him up until he killed you know who in the final season. Looking back on it, I can't see why I supported him and why it took that murder for me to turn against him.

[TheFeniX]

I'm more sympathetic to the argument about perspectives than the one about karma.Ace and his friends being nostalgic is to be expected,also mobsters dying because they ignore the rules of an organization dedicated to making violence and crime profitable is reasonable but if the director wanted us to take it with a grain of salt and he didn't make this clear throughout the film with either differing perspectives or through their actions he failed.

"Rome" didn't need 21st century people running around to portray the Roman alien mindset. The viewer offers the different perspective.

If there weren't enough scenes showing the victims and problems there should have been and to me that's more important than actually seeing the baddie go down. As long as the set of consequences they face are shown, and we see the consequences of their actions that takes it out of the realm of glorification to me, the karma is just the cherry on top. It may not be as strong a morality tale as it could have been but I don't always want movies to work that way tbh, I'd just rather they not be manipulative in the other direction.

There's nothing manipulative about Casino and Goodfellas. It's merely a portrayal of the mobster lifestyle. Where the glorification comes in is when you realize that all the murdering and thievery was A-ok until it was done against the interest of the mob bosses. Once that started happening is when things fell to shit. Ace sticks to the code and dodges a lot of the bullets. Karma doesn't kick Nikki in the ass because he murdered an old lady or cops or anyone else. "Karma" gets him because he tries to kill Ace after banging his wife.

The premise of both movies is that the mob would have kept things going fine (Casino even points out how much better Vegas was to the average person before the Mob was kicked out), but the protagonists broke away from the good Mafia values.

To go back to the Sopranos example:Tony Soprano could have beaten his enemies, saved his family and kicked his feet up and read a magazine as he enjoyed his peace in the final scene of the show and I would not consider it glorification. Nothing that happens to him, no matter how good, can erase the mountains of evidence we have of his evil. It's just not happening, so he can fuck as many strippers as he likes, be as big an alpha male as possible, we know he's shit. That's all that's needed.

That's because you, the viewer, understand killing people is wrong. But using that knowledge as a defense to glorification isn't fair. You have to take it within context of the work.

In both Goodfella's and Casino, Joe Pesci's characters are portrayed as guys who get shit done. They are the best of allies and the worst of enemies. They are badasses who don't take shit from anyone and get laid constantly (at least in Casino). It isn't until they fuck things up for the family that the glorification stops. Same with Liotta's character in GoodFella's. He's the fucking king, everyone loves him, he gets tables at all the fanciest places. It isn't until his descent into the coke dealing (he was told specifically to stay away from by the boss) that we see the shift in the movie. It's no longer about the lavish living as a mobster.

And in both movies, it's not due what we consider reasonable. Nikki doesn't get his because he becomes more of a murderous bastard or Henry just got into sampling his own product too much. It's about how the Mafia had it all right and they fucked it up because the went their own route. Ace isn't a good man either. He's more than willing to have someone killed or maimed. There is no karma backlash on him because he sticks to the plan... mostly.

[Napoleon the Clown]

Because it wasn't marketed at all, and marketing doesn't get people excited anyway. Right?

"Wow, a trailer for a movie about fast cars! I'm going to drop several thousand dollars on my Civic and go find some illegal racing community, because they totally aren't insular and suspicious of people suddenly showing up with tricked-out cars!"

And you consider this more likely than street racing rising on its own, and Hollywood trying to cash in on what is already popular? Really?

You are aware that you don't have to drop money into your car to participate in street racing, right?

[Adam Reynolds]

In a nutshell the problem here is that of the villain as protagonist. We naturally sympathize with those whose perspective we see the most. For an effective example, given that this is originally a Star Wars forum, look at the Darth Bane trilogy. In those books Darth Bane is an extremely evil person but yet as a reader one can't help but connect with him on some level. This is helped by the fact that he is not a hypocrite about his beliefs. He states that it is the duty of an apprentice to kill their master and when Zannah ultimately fights him his feeling is simply that whoever deserves to be master will win. This is a common element in much of the fiction that features villain protagonists is the lack of hypocrisy relative to the antagonists, who are often worse morally(though obviously not in the case of Bane).

In most of the examples cited here it is the same problem. In gangster movies they naturally see their role as proper within the code of organized crime. In this case it is the common concept of the prisoner's dilemma and the individual vs the group good vs the societal good. When one defects for individual interest, the narrative is that the results are always negative even when the group interest is competing with the greater societal interest. It would obviously be in the greater societal interest if organized crime didn't exist. Bruce Schneider 's Liars and Outliers is a somewhat interesting look at this general concept of competing interests and game theory with the emphasis on a societal view of security.

Heist movies are similar in that the issue of pulling off a heist is sufficiently difficult that we naturally root for someone clever enough to pull it off. This is one that oddly even happens in reality somewhat. When I was reading the non-fiction account of the 2003 Antwerp Diamond Heist (Flawless by Scott Selby and Greg Campbell*), I couldn't help but root for the thieves somewhat. The way they overcame the security system was sufficiently ingenious I was impressed, despite the fact that they were caught. The screwed up business model of diamond merchants also makes the thieves somewhat sympathetic, even in reality.

In Zero Dark Thirty(in this case whether they are villains is a matter of perspective) we see the perspective of CIA crusaders and US Navy Seals who never ask the question of whether it was worth it to go shoot a man hiding in his house. Even the use of terrorist attacks as borderline propaganda throughout the movie fits that narrative, it's something the protagonist would notice and be bothered by even though the casualties were limited in all of the post 9/11 attacks**. In this movie it felt to me as if it was trying to give the direct perspective of those in this field but in the process seemed to take away the sense of morality. The way Maya broke down crying at the ending fit that concept, she now had no idea what to do with her life.***

Another movie coming out this month that is similar is The Wolf of Wall Street(also done by Scorsese) about Jordan Belfort. Judging just from the trailer it seems to completely glorify his life as a fraudster on Wall Street focusing on the lavish parties and the obscene wealth rather than the consequences(because they are a slap on the wrist in reality).

(Antwerp Diamond Heist)
*There was also a rather self serving Wired Magazine article as told by the one thief that was easily caught, the inside man whose identity was known, in which he claimed it was some elaborate insurance scam and that much of what he stole was actually used for an insurance fraud and that they got much less than was reported. The largest problem with that story is that the vault was actually uninsured as Lloyds was smart enough to recognize that the security wasn't good enough.

(Zero Dark Thirty)
** Oddly, almost all of the attacks shown were outside America. One of the few that wasn't was the successful Times Square bombing.
*** As a side note the final scene reminded me of an anecdote mentioned in the movie Conspiracy, about the Wanasee conference, as told by Kritzinger to Heydrich. The story goes that there was a man who hated his father but loved his mother. His father would beat him and demean him while his mother nurtured and protected him. When his mother died, in his thirties, he found himself incapable of crying. When his father died he was in his fifties and he broke down and couldn't control himself. The idea was that when his mother died it was a loss, but when his father died his hatred had lost its object and his life was empty and over. The narrative with Maya's loss of Jessica and Bin Laden was similar.

[Gandalf]

Whoops. I misused the phrase. But yeah, Chase did say that. That happened to me too. I supported him up until he killed you know who in the final season. Looking back on it, I can't see why I supported him and why it took that murder for me to turn against him.

Because most of his targets tended to be other organised crime guys, who are acceptable targets. Tony kills people who have attacked him, or have been otherwise villainous such as Ralph. They're not particularly sympathetic figures, but neither was Tony. So watching them is fun, because it's bad people being bad to one another.

[Raw Shark]

This, I can't believe that there are conspiracy theories about this.

http://truthernews.wordpress.com/2013/1 ... ne-strike/

That site is some fantastic reading right there; thanks for sharing. Of course SKYNET the killer AI from Terminator is real! How do I know? Because the gub'mint named a satellite program SKYNET, like in Terminator! Duh.

IF Goodfellas and Casino did the same, then the characters can say whatever the fuck they like about how awesome their lives were, WE'LL know that they're bad. As I recall they were psychotic bastards there too, Pesci shot a kid then killed him and everyone put up with his insanity until he crossed one line, not sure that this reflects well on them.

The line was that he killed a Made Man. That was it. It's terrible that he was killed, according to the narration, not that a brutal murderer was murdered. [snip]

Regarding Pesci's character in Goodfellas, the manner in which DeNiro and Liota's characters tolerate his bugfuck craziness, and their reaction to his death: It's important to note that the guy played by Pesci was the only one of the three who was fully Italian and could become a made man. DeNiro and Liota were nervous around the guy by the time he killed Imperioli, and hated cleaning up his messes, but no matter how much of a train-wreck-in-progress he became, they needed him as an ally to advance their own careers in the mob and his death throws all of their years of plans for that into disarray.

[His Divine Shadow]

The thing is, DeNiro didn't spend his time outside of Goodfellas engaging in mob activities. Michael C. Hall doesn't spend his spare time killing people even if he portrayed a serial killer for many years

Well you can't prove a negative...

[K. A. Pital]

Michael C. Hall's portrayal of Dexter was pretty damning - the person destroyed or lost everything he loved due to his murder mania and was left a wreck, even if alive.

It is I think part of the problem I have with certain forms of art. Actually, cruel games don't necessarily represent a bad thing so as long as the violence they depict is realistic. I would say that a really gut-wrenching animation series with characters dying is a better education for the children than Tom & Jerry like shows where violence is applied casually in the form of bombs, huge metallic objects smashing characters et cetera and them staying alive after all this. It just creates the wrong impression, and children might be tempted to apply this "knowledge" they got from the absolutely non-violent TV game to their real pets. Not sure if that was ever discussed or no.

The purpose of adult art is to entertain way more than it is to educate. Lamentable as this is, it actually makes the idea of total irresponsibility of the artist way more true. An adult is supposed to know better, unlike a child.

[Broomstick]

The news reports are now that Walker and the driver were NOT engaged in drag racing, which is different from the first reports I heard about this. They were still probably going too fast, but in light of this new information the death seems considerably less karmic.

[FSTargetDrone]

I don't see the series continuing after this movie, but they could easily have a final revenge story with JS killing of PW offscreen, or, if there's enough film reel, cut it up and have him die in a car crash at the beginning of the movie.

Do you honestly think anything like that would ever make it to the screen? That would be condemned by probably everyone else with an opinion as being in exceedingly bad taste.

[TheFeniX]

Regarding Pesci's character in Goodfellas, the manner in which DeNiro and Liota's characters tolerate his bugfuck craziness, and their reaction to his death: It's important to note that the guy played by Pesci was the only one of the three who was fully Italian and could become a made man. DeNiro and Liota were nervous around the guy by the time he killed Imperioli, and hated cleaning up his messes, but no matter how much of a train-wreck-in-progress he became, they needed him as an ally to advance their own careers in the mob and his death throws all of their years of plans for that into disarray.

That doesn't explain why Conway visibly weeps and smashes up a phone booth after getting the news that DeVito was killed. Henry is pretty broken up about it as well. They are devasted their life-long friend is now dead, not that they lost their "in" with the mob. They are never nervous around DeVito (with the exception of "You're a funny guy"). If fact, the whole Imperoili murder shows them only annoyed that DeVito had killed a good kid and now they had to dump the body and come up with a story for his mother. Also, DeVito "made a mess."

Henry's first reaction to DeVito killing the Made Man (I forget his name), who's only crime (at that moment) was being an asshole, is to shut the door to keep witnesses out and Conway immediately jumps in the help with the murder. It's a fucking terrible idea all around, but their first instinct is to help their friend at the expense of everything else, including loyalty to mob rules.

They berate DeVito like someone who made a mess at a party, not like "holy shit, he just killed that guy for no reason, maybe we're next." That was the whole point. Murder for flimsy reasons was only bad because you made more work for your friends helping you clean things up, unless you killed the wrong guy.

[Raw Shark]

That doesn't explain why Conway visibly weeps and smashes up a phone booth after getting the news that DeVito was killed. Henry is pretty broken up about it as well. They are devasted their life-long friend is now dead, not that they lost their "in" with the mob.

Probably both, IMHO. I mean, I'd probably visibly weep and smash something if my promising career ended abruptly, and they did know the guy since they were all young. I've got a couple friends who I think are batshit insane, but I'd be pretty upset if they were murdered.

Also, DeVito? Man, I guess it has been a long time since I've watched this... ;]

They are never nervous around DeVito (with the exception of "You're a funny guy").

I think that one scene demonstrates amply that the guy made them nervous. Henry actually thought that his childhood friend was abruptly and murderously angry over an innocuous remark without already thinking the guy is nuts? Bullshit.

If fact, the whole Imperoili murder shows them only annoyed that DeVito had killed a good kid and now they had to dump the body and come up with a story for his mother. Also, DeVito "made a mess."

Henry's first reaction to DeVito killing the Made Man (I forget his name), who's only crime (at that moment) was being an asshole, is to shut the door to keep witnesses out and Conway immediately jumps in the help with the murder. It's a fucking terrible idea all around, but their first instinct is to help their friend at the expense of everything else, including loyalty to mob rules.

They berate DeVito like someone who made a mess at a party, not like "holy shit, he just killed that guy for no reason, maybe we're next." That was the whole point. Murder for flimsy reasons was only bad because you made more work for your friends helping you clean things up, unless you killed the wrong guy.

My point exactly: You said that they looked the other way because Pesci was in the mob, but they are willing to support Pesci over the mob because in actuality they support him out of self-interest.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Unsurprisingly, F7 is on hold.

[TheFeniX]

Probably both, IMHO. I mean, I'd probably visibly weep and smash something if my promising career ended abruptly, and they did know the guy since they were all young. I've got a couple friends who I think are batshit insane, but I'd be pretty upset if they were murdered.

Their careers did not end. Tommy was never their "in" to the mob itself. It was their "in" to basically get away with any shit they wanted if Tommy got made. It's basically just tenure for gangsters.

I think that one scene demonstrates amply that the guy made them nervous. Henry actually thought that his childhood friend was abruptly and murderously angry over an innocuous remark without already thinking the guy is nuts? Bullshit.

"Get the fuck out of here." Even after the long drawn out "joke" from a vicious killer, Henry still cannot believe his childhood friend would honestly be insulted or kill him for the insult. You ever notice how Henry talks to Tommy? Now imagine what would happen if someone else talked to him that way? Oh wait, they end up dead.

My point exactly: You said that they looked the other way because Pesci was in the mob, but they are willing to support Pesci over the mob because in actuality they support him out of self-interest.

They are all in the mob. Just because Tommy is fully Italian and can be made doesn't mean their careers fall apart without him. In fact, they continue business as usual even after Tommy's death. Conway and Henry were already widely liked and respected mobsters, Henry himself hitting the bigtime after the airport robbery.

They helped Tommy kill a made man. If anyone found out about their involvement, they are both dead. That doesn't bode well for your "self-interest" argument. They help Tommy because that's what good friends do, mob be damned.

[Raw Shark]

Probably both, IMHO. I mean, I'd probably visibly weep and smash something if my promising career ended abruptly, and they did know the guy since they were all young. I've got a couple friends who I think are batshit insane, but I'd be pretty upset if they were murdered.

Their careers did not end. Tommy was never their "in" to the mob itself. It was their "in" to basically get away with any shit they wanted if Tommy got made. It's basically just tenure for gangsters.

Okay, "ended" was a poor choice of wording; it was a huge setback.

I think that one scene demonstrates amply that the guy made them nervous. Henry actually thought that his childhood friend was abruptly and murderously angry over an innocuous remark without already thinking the guy is nuts? Bullshit.

"Get the fuck out of here." Even after the long drawn out "joke" from a vicious killer, Henry still cannot believe his childhood friend would honestly be insulted or kill him for the insult. You ever notice how Henry talks to Tommy? Now imagine what would happen if someone else talked to him that way? Oh wait, they end up dead.

Right, but there's that really tense moment before he says that.

My point exactly: You said that they looked the other way because Pesci was in the mob, but they are willing to support Pesci over the mob because in actuality they support him out of self-interest.

They are all in the mob.

Nobody's saying that they aren't, sorry if that was unclear.

Just because Tommy is fully Italian and can be made doesn't mean their careers fall apart without him. In fact, they continue business as usual even after Tommy's death. Conway and Henry were already widely liked and respected mobsters, Henry himself hitting the bigtime after the airport robbery.

Sure they become very successful anyway eventually, but they didn't know that would happen. If I remember correctly, the voice-over paints Tommy's death as a professional, not just personal, disaster at the time that it happens.

They helped Tommy kill a made man. If anyone found out about their involvement, they are both dead. That doesn't bode well for your "self-interest" argument. They help Tommy because that's what good friends do, mob be damned.

If anyone found out they were just there and didn't stop him, they'd be dead, too, probably. Their safest bet was to help cover it up as fast as possible. Anyway, nobody's saying they're not friends, just that Tommy's increasingly-erratic behavior was not perfectly acceptable to them because he was their friend and the "good guys' rabid dog," it was tolerated grudgingly by them because he provided them with a potential advantage. Getting saddled with a lunatic who can't be fired as a coworker because it's your surest path to a promotion is not a very glamorous or consequence-free portrayal of mob life, in my opinion.

[Mr. Coffee]

How the fuck did a thread about a guy dying degenerate into a three page discussion on if celebrities deserve a bad end because of roles they've played in movies and tv? Seriously, if you honestly believe Walker deserved to die in a fire because he starred in a movie I'll just say here and now that you are a waste of fucking air and should stop goddamn posting.

Want to know what killed Walker and his friend? The answer is that Posche's entire design department is run by wild haired mad scientists.

THE SUPER CAR THAT KILLED PAUL WALKER

The vehicle that Actor, Philanthropist, women’s heartthrob, Paul Walker, is notorious among both car enthusiasts who own one but aren’t trained to drive – and the professionals that race this beast around a track.

paul-walkerThe 2005 Carrera GT that Paul Walker and Roger Rodas were killed in on Nov. 30 was a limited-edition, high-performance sports car produced by Porsche between 2004 and 2007 that sold new for about $450,000. In stock form, its V10 engine puts out 612 horsepower, though the engine in the GT that Rodas was driving might have been modified to produce even more power.

The Carrera GT quickly developed a reputation as a car for skilled drivers only, Patrick George, of the auto enthusiast website Jalopnik, tells THR. Jeremy Clarkson, the host of BBC’s Top Gear, once described its handling as “knife edge” and that if the driver makes a mistake, “It bites your head off.” Jay Leno, a collector of high-performance sports cars, famously spun out in a Carrera GT at high speed in 2005 while attempting to set a speed record at Talladega Superspeedway in Alabama.

The red Carrera GT that was involved in the accident that killed Paul Walker was being driven by his business partner Roger Rodas, himself no slouch behind the wheel. Rodas has raced in the Pirelli World Challenge series and is, by all accounts, a capable driver. But none of us are saints, capable or not. If we’re in a high performance car, there are times when we’ll put the foot to the floor.

Performance Stats:

This was no ordinary super car. Just saying that alone should keep men with an extra $400k sitting around from buying one. This is the same car that Jay Leno spun out in while trying to win a land speed reccord in Alabama. The following is a quote written by a Porsche Designer & Test Driver, Walter Rohrl:

“Former world rally champion and Porsche test driver Walter Rohrl told Drive the new Porsche supercar is “the first car in my life that I drive and I feel scared”.

Earlier this year, Rohrl said, the engineering team was about to cancel a day’s testing at the famous Nurburgring circuit because of wet weather. But, Rohrl said, when he insisted the car had to be tested in slippery conditions, he discovered the car’s daunting performance.

“I came back into the pits and I was white,” Rohrl said. “I immediately said to the engineers that we need one button for the wet and one button for the dry”, referring to the need for a traction control switch.”

During the Carrera GT’s development, Porsche test driver Walter Rohrl told the Australian website Drive that the GT was “the first car in my life that I drive and I feel scared.”ku-xlarge The car was so powerful that Rohrl insisted Porsche install traction control to keep the rear wheels from spinning during heavy acceleration. A case over a fatal Carrera GT crash during a club race at the California Speedway was settled for $4.5 million in 2007.

“It’s a batshit crazy car and as close to an analog Formula One car as you can get,” says an automotive journalist who has driven the GT. “It really demands your attention — it’ll bite back if you don’t give it the proper input.”

Adds Loren Beggs, owner of 911 Design in Montclair, Calif., which restores and tunes Porsches: “The Carrera GT is an unbelievably high-performance car. They are very fast and have an incredible sound to them.”

Doug DeMuro, a former manager at Porsche Cars North America and friend of Jalopnik loves the Carrera GT, but still believes it’s incredibly dangerous:

“The car is crazy. We know of the incident Leno had (where he spun it at Talladega) and of course the one at Fontana, where those two guys died in 2005 — that one was REALLY sad because it was very similar circumstances to this — a guy went for a ride, then crash, both died, at least one left behind a young family. There was also the German prince who smashed up a Gemballa version, and (at least) one serious accident in Europe.

I think conservative estimates say something like 70 of these are off the road, and they keep severely injuring and killing people. My favorite car ever, in the whole world, but man are they dangerous. A close friend of mine has one here and I refuse to let him take me for a ride — even the pros at the driving school in Birmingham were really cautious with it.”

If you’re ever offered a ride, definitely think twice about it… and if you ever get the chance to drive, for God’s sake be careful.

We spoke to IndyCar star Graham Rahal, who multiple sources believe previously owned the Carrera GT involved in Walker’s crash, and he says that the CGT is a car that demands respect:

“It’s a race car for the street. Simple as that. It asks for and needs respect at all time. It’s not a car for people who don’t have experience driving high end vehicles or race cars really for that matter. However I believe Roger was an experienced road racer. To me the CGT is in the top 3 vehicles ever made, possibly the greatest road car ever made.”

This isn’t a car for inexperienced drivers. It’s an old school supercar, which means that given the chance, it will bite you. While it still isn’t clear if the crash was caused by racing, mechanical failure, or driver error, what is clear is that the CGT isn’t a car to be toyed with. If you don’t respect it, there is a solid chance that it won’t respect you.

Car Specs:

Porsche_Carrera_GT_engineThe Carrera GT is powered by a 5.7 litre V10 engine producing 612 hp (450 kW), whereas the original concept car featured a 5.5 litre version rated at 558 hp (416 kW). Porsche claims it will accelerate from 0 to 100 km/h (62.1 mph) in 3.9 seconds and has a maximum speed of 330 km/h (205 mph), although road tests indicated that in reality the car can accelerate from 0-60 mph (97 km/h) in 3.5 seconds and 0-100 mph (160 km/h) in 6.8 seconds. The Carrera GT has a basic five colour paint scheme which includes Guards Red, Fayence Yellow, Basalt Black, GT Silver and Seal Grey. Custom colours were later available from the factory. A traditional six-speed manual transmission is the only available transmission. Attached to this gearbox is a beechwood gearknob which pays homage to the wooden gearknob used in the Porsche 917 Le Mans racers. In its second year of production, a carbon fibre knob was also made available.

The Carrera GT has large side inlets and air dams that help cool the large V10 engine framed by the carbon fibre rear bonnet. Fitted with Porsche’s latest Carbon fibre-reinforced Silicon Carbide (C/SiC) ceramic composite brake system, the 15-inch (380 mm) SGL Carbon disc brakes make an impressive appearance underneath the 19 inch front and 20 inch rear wheels. Similar to other Porsche models, such as the 911, the GT includes an automated rear wing spoiler which deploys above 70 mph (110 km/h).

The interior is fitted with soft leather. Bose audio system and a navigation system were standard. In typical Porsche fashion, the ignition is to the left of the steering wheel. This placement dates back to the early days of Le Mans racing when drivers were required to make a running start, hop into their cars, start them and begin the race. The placement of the ignition enabled the driver to start the car with his left hand and put it in gear with his right.

Walker and his friend aren't the first people this car has killed.

[JLTucker]

I am laughing that there's no goddamn traction control on that car. It's like they had Sarah Plain design the thing. "We aint' got freedom unless we can drive as fast as we want with no performance regulations!"

[Enigma]

Definitely a super car. It's impractical and expensive, thus making it the perfect purchase for the upper middle class and higher?

[Gaidin]

Not so sure 'middle' is supposed to be a part of that statement.

[Enigma]

Not so sure 'middle' is supposed to be a part of that statement.

You don't think they could afford a $400k super death car?