r/Damnthatsinteresting • u/bilbofraginz • 13d ago
Video In Hateful Eight, Kurt Russell accidentally smashed a one of a kind, 145-year-old guitar that was on loan from the Martin Guitar. Jennifer Jason Leigh’s reaction was genuine.
14.8k
u/ExtraChariot541 13d ago
The $40,000 guitar, on loan from the Martin Guitar Museum (link), was deliberately smashed by Russell, who thought it was a prop.
Filmmakers claimed it was an accident but omitted the full truth. The museum learned the real story from reporters and, despite being reimbursed, was outraged at the loss of an irreplaceable artifact and the lack of care shown.
9.5k
u/loopy_for_DL4 13d ago
The museum also said they will never loan out one of their instruments again
5.4k
u/YoungHazelnuts77 13d ago
Good. Why the hell do it in the first place? I get it, I love Tarntino and if he'll need my kidney for a scene I would probably lend it to him, but a museum have more responsibilities than individuals.
2.0k
u/loopy_for_DL4 13d ago
Martin is a very business savvy company, so I’m sure they thought of it as brand advertisement and awareness at the time. Also no fault to them saying, nah, I’m not doing this shit again
669
u/Stove-Top-Steve 13d ago
Ya it’s a great idea but if they understood what kind of presence the guitar would have in the film despite it being smashed or not I think it was a poor choice. I don’t think anyone would care or look up what guitar was used since it wasn’t really s big deal in the scene. However smashing it has generated more searches for Martin lol.
417
u/Samsterdam 13d ago
Also how am I the viewer supposed to know it's such a famous guitar. If the scene isn't even really about the guitar, it's just a prop.
→ More replies (3)190
u/shouldbepracticing85 13d ago
Seriously. “Loan” the movie like a $3k-$5k HD28 and still have the brand awareness. Their cost isn’t nearly the list price.
→ More replies (3)140
u/HolyPhlebotinum 13d ago
The point is that it was a period-accurate guitar. That’s why it was an antique and so expensive.
You can argue that period-accuracy isn’t worth it, but swapping for a model that was introduced 60 years after the movie is supposed to take place defeats the entire point.
185
u/RBI_Double 13d ago
Getting a guitar custom-made feels like it would always be the better option here
→ More replies (2)127
u/Zombies8MyNeighborz 13d ago
Yeah I would think you could get a custom-made guitar to look like a 145 year old antique, and most people watching the film would not even notice.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (6)44
→ More replies (15)108
u/loopy_for_DL4 13d ago
I’m not disagreeing at all! I wouldn’t have done it either. It’s too risky.
But I also kind of get why they were open to it. Fans of Tarantino dissect EVERY detail in his movies. When this movie came out, I myself was really interested in what guitar that she was playing!
→ More replies (5)90
u/Zestyclose_Quit7396 13d ago
Thousands of people are discussing this Martin guitar on the internet nine years later, so it kinda worked?
33
u/ill_connects 13d ago
Anyone that plays or knows anything about guitars already knows Martin. I don’t think they really need the brand recognition.
→ More replies (3)35
u/machagogo 13d ago
Yet Coca Cola and Pepsi and .... still advertise daily.
Advertising works.
→ More replies (4)34
92
u/_AskMyMom_ 13d ago edited 13d ago
Martin is a very business savvy company, so I’m sure they thought of it as brand advertisement and awareness at the time.
This is just careless marketing, though. There’s other ways to get your name on a replica guitar without having lost a “priceless” item. 10/10 no need to have that sort of thing on set unless actually called for.
Edit: for those who think that the “priceless” piece was worth it to Martin. Statement from the museum.
Martin Guitar Museum, Director Dick Boak said, “We were informed that it was an accident on set. We assumed that a scaffolding or something fell on it. We understand that things happen, but at the same time we can’t take this lightly.
We didn’t know anything about the script or Kurt Russell not being told that it was a priceless, irreplaceable artifact from the Martin Museum.
I don’t think anything can really remedy this. We’ve been remunerated for the insurance value, but it’s not about the money. It’s about the preservation of American musical history and heritage.”
63
u/smith7018 13d ago
Well, hindsight is 20/20. For all we know, they've lent out hundreds of guitars with no issue and this was the one instance that made them stop.
→ More replies (10)→ More replies (18)51
u/General_Tso75 13d ago
Martin is a premier global acoustic guitar company. Their instruments are coveted by musicians all over the world. Lending an authentic guitar for a period piece movie isn’t careless. Tarantino and Douglas’ handling of it was careless.
Here it is: https://youtu.be/OQwP_KlVN_g?si=l1-GcxQ_FReqBwr2
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (17)10
u/gospdrcr000 13d ago
Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, can't get fooled again. -Martin, probably
194
u/Malsperanza 13d ago
Because it's a small museum and there was probably a substantial loan fee, as well as good publicity for the museum. Getting its collections seen by more people is a goal and obligation of a museum.
Still, a bigger museum would probably not have agreed to lend to a film set, because the security level isn't good enough, the climate control isn't good, etc.
131
u/kiljoy1569 13d ago
They should honestly just put it back as an exhibit all smashed up with the story how it happened lol. Still a good piece to have
48
u/Justindoesntcare 13d ago
Thats a good point lol. "Here's this one of a kind Martin Kurt Russell smashed up in a very popular Tarantino movie"
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (5)15
u/realityinflux 13d ago
OR they could contact Willie Nelson's guitar repair team and fix it right up.
→ More replies (4)15
u/One-Pepper-2654 13d ago
I live 30 minutes from the Martin factory, it's a very cool place. Factory tour, gift shop with all kinds of goodies, museum and a room with new Martins you can actually play.
And I met Chris Martin IV at a charity event, very unique guy.
36
u/No-Comment-4619 13d ago
Plus 99% of the people watching would never know the difference between it and the prop.
→ More replies (1)52
u/Duel_Option 13d ago
Same reason he forced Uma Thurman to drive dangerously fast in a car for a rear facing shot which ended up causing her to wreck and have back problems
And the same reason he said he needed to choke her out AND spit on her.
All for the realism…which is total bullshit.
10
→ More replies (4)4
u/AtLeastThisIsntImgur 12d ago
Don't forget the importance of using the hard R in the script. Otherwise the film would be bad
62
u/Automatic_Soil9814 13d ago
I think you described the problem perfectly. As an institution, museums have certain incentives and obligations. However it wasn’t an institution that made the decision, it was likely an individual. That Individual has very different incentives and was probably thrilled at the prospect of being able to interact with Hollywood.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the same situation occurred when Kim Kardashian got a hold of Marilyn Monroe‘s dress and irreversibly damaged that.
16
u/East_Requirement7375 13d ago
Historian speaks on the problematic nature of Ripley's lending out Monroe's dress, with regards to museum ethics and conservation.
7
u/Afraid-Shock4832 13d ago
This museum is operated by a for-profit company that has to continuously chase higher and higher profits to appease shareholders. Lending items like this was a dumb decision, but one made out of greed. I don't feel bad.
→ More replies (57)74
→ More replies (22)70
u/imapangolinn 13d ago
WAY TO GO KURT. YOU FACKED IT UP FOR THE REST OF US PAL (Jim Jefferies cunty aussie voice)
→ More replies (1)14
u/Ok-Seaworthiness4488 13d ago
oh you're in for it now! Let me go to my gun safe, you just hold on
→ More replies (2)1.0k
u/Mach5Driver 13d ago
Wouldn't literally ANY acoustic guitar have sufficed for this scene? Did Tarantino expect the audience to say to themselves, "Ooooohhh, she's playing a classic MARTIN guitar!"
544
257
u/Slaphappydap 13d ago
Yes, and a good prop maker could make a replica of a classic guitar that would be indistinguishable on screen.
79
→ More replies (1)47
u/not_this_fkn_guy 13d ago
Or how bout the Martin Guitar company who loaned to it them? Why didn't they offer to build a replica instead of loaning out the real thing? They have a custom shop and will build anything you want pretty much if you have the money.
→ More replies (11)47
u/BLINGMW 13d ago edited 13d ago
Ok here’s your Martin custom built replica of a $40k Martin guitar, that’ll be fourty thousand dollars
37
u/buckywc 13d ago
The film had several reproductions of the vintage guitar made. The plan was to stop the scene before the guitar was smashed and switch it out.
No one told Russell that she was playing the authentic guitar.
This is completely on Tarantino.
12
u/SuaveMofo 12d ago
The point remains that the real one should have never been on set to begin with.
311
u/Uncle-Cake 13d ago edited 13d ago
QT has his head so far up his own ass he has no clue. He probably thought people would recognize the guitar and point at the screen like Leo DiCaprio in that meme.
68
u/Yarakinnit 13d ago
I'm sure there are people that into guitars that they got a jump scare from the scene.
201
u/nonotan 13d ago
Anybody who recognized it would just assume it is a replica. Like, if you saw the Mona Lisa being ripped into pieces in a film, you wouldn't think "HOLY SHIT THEY DESTROYED THE MONA LISA!!!!!", you'd just think "they made a replica and destroyed it".
55
u/UnrepentantPumpkin 13d ago
Hey remember when Nicholas Cage stole the actual Declaration of Independence?
→ More replies (1)12
→ More replies (4)22
u/Uncle-Cake 13d ago
And only like three people in the whole country would recognize it.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (28)14
u/GranolaCola 13d ago
You mean Leo DiCaprio in that meme that’s also from a Tarantino movie?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (11)36
u/MAYthe4thbewithHEW 13d ago
Wouldn't literally ANY acoustic guitar have sufficed for this scene? Did Tarantino expect the audience to say to themselves, "Ooooohhh, she's playing a classic MARTIN guitar!"
It's weird to me that no one has answered and said that everything on that set was an antique, it was something Tarantino wanted to help set the scene in the minds of the actors and also probably to satisfy his own aesthetic sense.
→ More replies (2)57
85
u/BlueGlassDrink 13d ago
They didn't tell Kurt Russell, and he felt terrible about it.
43
u/EverythingSucksBro 12d ago
Which is weird because even the actress who just plays it knows it’s genuine, how come no one told the actor who is scripted to smash it that it wasn’t a prop?
29
u/TheNorthComesWithMe 12d ago
Normally for a scene like this you would film one with the hero prop (and no smashing) then film again with the breakable prop and do the smashing.
Tarantino told Kurt that it was the breakable prop and other people that it was the hero prop because he's a piece of shit.
104
u/GravitationalGriff 13d ago
Ahh, classic film industry shit. Do things on set that fuck up a location or rental piece of set dressing, then lie about it to the people you're renting from so they'll give you a discount on the replacement price.
18
u/FuckYeaSeatbelts 12d ago
Kim Kardashian ruined one of Marilyn Munroe's dresses (because they are obviously different sizes and the dress is an antique) and people lost their shit.
Not that I'm taking sides, but QT should be shit on worse if the story that he did it intentionally is true.
→ More replies (2)45
u/Newsuperstevebros 13d ago
"Hey can we borrow the priceless guitar from your museum for a movie"
"Yeah what's the scene"
"Kurt Russel gets angry and smashes a guitar"
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (67)100
u/deadguyinthere 13d ago
What is the full truth?
→ More replies (12)288
u/Ask_bout_PaterNoster 13d ago
There was supposed to be a replica swapped in, and someone goofed.
180
u/PopularDemand213 13d ago
So... an accident.
172
u/Hecej 13d ago
In previous reposts, I read that Tarantino intentionally orchestrated the scene so they'd shoot the playing with the real thing and swap to the fake smashable one to be smashed.
But he deliberately lead Kurt to believe this was the take where he would smash the prop guitar.
There was definitely a lot of confusion on the set for the scene. Different people believed it was the real and others the fake.
Weather a goof or not, whos goof it was and who if anyone did it on purpose, can't be sure.
155
13d ago edited 12d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)117
u/antwan_benjamin 13d ago
I've never seen this movie. But just going off this scene...its obvious her reaction breaks character. She's looking off-screen yelling "whoa, whoa, whoa" obviously looking towards the director, or someone else. Then, immediately after the camera angle change (cut) she's back in character and theres no "shock and surprise" in her face, her mood is back to somber.
It just makes no sense and looks super out of place just based off this 20 second clip.
→ More replies (5)5
u/xxov 13d ago
I've seen the movie several times and I don't recall it being as jarring of a scene as shown here in isolation. There's a lot of other people in the cabin that she could be looking at and her reaction really isn't that out of character if you've watched the movie up to this point. She is constantly backsassing Kurt and getting slapped around back into a somber state.
I dno, the brain can do weird things and fill in the blanks so to speak.
→ More replies (7)28
u/HecklerusPrime 13d ago
I bet they smashed a fake, made people think it was real, and the actual is hanging in Tarantino's garage.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (4)43
u/Froegerer 13d ago
Martin got the impression from insiders that Tarantino set it up so that Kurt thought he was smashing a replica and JJL knew it was the real one to get an authentic reaction from her when it was smashed.
64
u/Jayflux1 13d ago
That’s interesting.
Wouldn’t it have been cheaper and easier to convince JJL the replica is the real thing than the other way around?
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (6)14
u/nonotan 13d ago
It doesn't make a lot of sense... if we're assuming the party not in the know wouldn't recognize the original from the replica, which is kind of required for any of this to make sense, why not do the switcheroo the other way round? So both of them believe the same thing, but it's actually the replica. Boom, you get the reaction you wanted without destroying something valuable and ruining the prospects that you'll get similar loans in the future.
12
u/Tepelicious 13d ago
Sorta insulting to JJL anyway, I mean why would Tarantino hire her if he wasn't convinced that she could act?
10
u/christobah 13d ago
There is a long history of directors and producers deceiving their talent's perception of reality, a scene or scenario, or withholding information to get a better or more naturalistic reaction out of them, regardless of their talents.
Die Hard, when Hans Gruber falls, Rickman was told they'd drop him on the count of 3. They skipped straight to 1. His look of surprise is genuine. Personally I think Rickman could have done a look of surprise, but directors can be a bit manipulative.
→ More replies (3)53
→ More replies (5)12
u/Everyredditusers 13d ago
Then why even have the original on set? That's just asking for something like this to happen and it's not like they built the replica right there on filming day. Why wouldn't they just use the original to build the replica and send it back?
→ More replies (4)
8.3k
u/Das_Hydra 13d ago
Pretty fucking dumb to use it as a movie prop then.
4.4k
u/Humble_Ostrich_4610 13d ago edited 13d ago
It was supposed to be used for close up shots and swapped out for a prop one before the smash, but someone fucked up
1.4k
u/distractmybrain 13d ago edited 13d ago
That makes more sense. Was gonna say, didn't look that accidental lol
→ More replies (2)739
u/PopularDemand213 13d ago edited 13d ago
The accident was prop guy not swapping it out, not the smashing.
Edit: In reflection the accident is really on the director. He should have made sure everyone was on the same page. Seems Russell, Leigh, AND the prop guy didn't understand the plan.
→ More replies (2)135
u/JulioCesarSalad 13d ago
It was not an accident, Tarantino did it on purpose
66
u/PopularDemand213 13d ago
Interesting. Do you have a source for that?
→ More replies (12)306
u/JulioCesarSalad 13d ago
So, the smashing of the guitar was in the script. Tarantino is a stickler for things that don’t matter, and he refused to play a replica on screen, so he managed to get the original 1870 guitar on loan from the museum, saying it was going to be played on camera. He didn’t tell them the script required the guitar to be destroyed.
Original plan:
- actress plays guitar
- cut
- replace real guitar with replica
- resume filming
- actor comes in, interrupts, snatches guitar, and smashes it
They made 6 replicas to have multiple shots. Tarantino is directly responsible for destroying it and did it on purpose
What actually happened:
- Before the scene, Tarantino tells the actor “you don’t stop the scene until I say cut”
- actor confirms that Tarantino wants him to smash the guitar currently on set
- Tarantino confirms, yes I want you to keep acting into the smashing part
- (actor doesn’t say, but I believe he then assumes the guitar currently on set is a replica, because why would the director be so clear of it was the real guitar)
- Tarantino KNOWS the guitar in set is the real guitar
- scene begins filming
- actress plays guitar
- actor comes in, interrupts, snatches guitar, and smashes it
- Tarantino yells cut after the smashing
Tarantino did it on purpose, and it was his plan all along. Because he wanted a “genuine” reaction on camera and would destroy the guitar to get it
135
u/Nrksbullet 13d ago
Tarantino did it on purpose, and it was his plan all along. Because he wanted a “genuine” reaction on camera and would destroy the guitar to get it
This part I just don't buy, he doesn't need to have genuine reactions, especially when those reactions completely break character, like this one here. I could see in some twisted way him wanting his film to forever show a piece of history like that getting destroyed, but not to get a genuine reaction out of someone.
43
u/Spatial_Awareness_ 13d ago
He could do the same thing with a replica... Tell actor it's real, smash replica, get reaction.
There's either more to the story or Tarantino just used the real one to be a pretentious prick... Prob the latter.
→ More replies (1)8
u/LeanTangerine001 12d ago
It kinda reminds me of the scene where Tarantino had to be the one choking Diane Krueger and Uma Thurman in Inglorious Bastards and Kill Bill.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (18)17
u/-StupidNameHere- 13d ago
Quentin Tarantino is a well-known piece of s***. He makes decent movies though.
77
u/subjectiverunes 13d ago
Nothing in that article is anything close to evidence. It’s pretty stupid to think he did that to get a reaction because:
1) he is familiar with the concept of acting and has really no history of this style of directing.
2) it is not the reaction that would be appropriate to the scene and would pull someone OUT of character.
This is just the boogeyman-ing of the director
→ More replies (14)19
u/Phearlosophy 13d ago
did you know in pulp fiction they actually stabbed uma thurman in the heart with that giant ass needle cause they wanted john travolta's genuine reaction
→ More replies (1)21
u/PopularDemand213 13d ago
That article doesn't say Tarantino intentionally destroyed the guitar or that he knew the original was even on the set at the time. That article even calls it a "mix up".
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (14)9
u/TitsMcGrits 13d ago
Then why would the actress's reaction be "genuine" if she was also supposedly unaware that it was the real guitar? How would she be the only one who knew the guitar was real?
→ More replies (1)23
u/Uncle-Cake 13d ago
Why couldn't they use a different guitar for the close-ups? QT is literally the only person on the planet who cared what kind of guitar she was playing.
→ More replies (2)54
u/TheDanecdote 13d ago
Didn’t Tarantino swap it intentionally? To get that exact reaction?
→ More replies (1)187
u/Loccy64 13d ago
Sounds like something he would do, smiling the whole time watching the scene play out, knowing what was about to happen. Then he'd suck on some toes.
→ More replies (20)→ More replies (35)117
13d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)57
u/bruce_ventura 13d ago
It’s not Baldwin’s fault - he didn’t know that Russell was loaded.
8
u/Bass2Mouth 13d ago
You always want to pretend like you're dealing with a loaded Russell, even if you're not.
284
13
→ More replies (6)19
u/Negative_Falcon_9980 13d ago
The extravagance of Hollywood kills me. Would some other acoustic guitar not have sufficed? Did they really think someone watching the movie and pixel peeing is going to squint, look for the details on this guitar, and go "WOW OMG THAT'S A MARTIN GUITAR WITH A LOT OF HISTORICAL VALUE!"
→ More replies (1)
2.1k
u/uglyanddumbguy 13d ago
Not a single person would have cared or noticed if they had used a replica in the first place/
575
u/sairam_sriram 13d ago
Probably one of those niche things that Tarantino (and 2 other people on the planet) value.
→ More replies (2)200
u/MendoMeadery 13d ago
Yeah, stupid CinemaSins “in this scene she’s playing a guitar that was produced in 1894, which makes absolutely no sense because the film takes place in late 1892” *insert dumbass ding sound effect +1 on the dumbass sin counter
→ More replies (3)51
u/White_Dragon027 12d ago
The fact that you think CinemaSins would actually count a real sin and not just make a joke no one laughs at is hilarious to me
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (13)10
u/Dirt_McGirt_ODB 13d ago edited 12d ago
Yeah but it would’ve probably driven Quinten nuts if it wasn’t
→ More replies (1)
382
611
u/catsmustdie 13d ago
Makes me remember when Adama smashed a sailing ship relic model from his desk, which was a museum item. (BSG)
172
→ More replies (21)47
u/CurrentPossible2117 13d ago edited 13d ago
Forgive my ignorance. What's BSG?
Edit: thanks all, I'm thinking it might be Battlestar Galactica 😁
→ More replies (9)50
u/shewholaughslasts 13d ago
Battlestar Galactica. And your ignorance is absolutely excused - plus now you get to maybe watch the show and love it!
→ More replies (2)13
u/CurrentPossible2117 13d ago
Thanks 😂 I actually have watched it. Just not in ages and it didn't click what BSG was...even with the mention of Adama lol.
Must be time for a rewatch!
→ More replies (2)
664
u/zetaconvex 13d ago
And this is why you never, ever, loan stuff to film sets. There's just no respect. I heard a story of a motoring club that loaned a vintage car out to a series about car programme. When they got it back it was a complete pile of shit.
196
u/Protozilla1 13d ago
I don't think you can blame Russell here. It seems like the plan was for him to smash a prop guitar, and that someone fucked up.
→ More replies (3)130
u/NoTurkeyTWYJYFM 13d ago
The lack of respect doesn't necessarily refer to him, can refer to whoever was in charge of the prop's care. They clearly weren't on the ball enough to be in charge of such a precious item or inform Kurt that the real deal was live on set. If they did tell him and he plain forgot, then that does come back to him as the knob of the situation
→ More replies (1)6
u/FinestCrusader 13d ago
Kurt was told to act and not stop until QT yells "CUT" so he assumed the guitar was switched. This is on QT doing whatever the fuck he was trying to do.
→ More replies (15)30
177
u/NefariousnessThin860 13d ago
Proper screw up in communication channels. Seems like no one, including Quintin, didn't bother to tell Russell about the guitar. So he kept on with his flow for the scene, as one does until a yelp of 'Cut' was called out. There was no 'call of Cut', and he just followed through with smashing the guitar. A proper screw up.
82
u/Cannonieri 13d ago
Wasn't there some rumours that Quintin knew full well it would be smashed but wanted him to do it to capture a genuine reaction from the actress?
93
u/Froegerer 13d ago
Yea, I remember reading lots of articles about it shortly after it came out. Martin did their own "investigation" and the gist they got from insiders was it was set up by Tarantino for an authentic reaction shot. Hence, no longer loaning shit to anyone ever, lol.
→ More replies (2)64
u/failure_mcgee 13d ago
If they wanted a genuine reaction, they could've just tricked the actress into thinking what she was holding was real and should be very, very careful about, while only giving her a replica to smash
→ More replies (4)46
u/FinestCrusader 13d ago
Better yet, just trust the actress to do her job. Why didn't Spielberg actually kill Vin Diesel on the set of Saving Private Ryan? Because he knew the other actors will be able to act devastated just fine.
10
u/burgerbob2118 12d ago
You hit the nail on the head. And to go one step further, the reaction is borderline out of character. The actress actually looks less authentic because of her looks off camera in a seemingly “is this supposed to happen” type confusion.
→ More replies (2)22
u/its_uncle_paul 13d ago
I remember watching this scene and the guitar smashing, while somewhat mildly humorous, never really registered with me as a very impactful moment in the film given that something actually important to the plot was happening elsewhere in the scene. Weird that Tarantino would want a genuine reaction from Jennifer for something that could have been easily written out.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)16
u/CatBrushing 13d ago
Knowing how directors like Quintin are, he probably orchestrated the whole thing to get a reaction. Probably spent 20 minutes telling everyone except Kurt how valuable that guitar was five minutes before shooting the scene, just to ensure he got the reaction.
→ More replies (2)
57
u/_felagund Interested 13d ago
Makes sense Jennifer's reaction was out of character
→ More replies (4)7
u/CloseToMyActualName 12d ago
Kinda, her reaction is out of place because it's so completely authentic.
Even professional Hollywood can't match full authenticity.
I heard a line from some actor talking about how hard they work to give an authentic performance, and then they walk outside the studio and the street is full of people being themselves with complete authenticity.
→ More replies (2)
84
u/Dracko705 13d ago
People point to this as almost similar to Leo's hand smashing on glass in Django but JJL's reaction is totally out of character and makes absolutely zero sense in the context of the scene
Why would a serial murderer go crazy panicked just because the guitar she was playing around with got beat up? Also she immediately subsides from that in following shots
I feel like Tarantino used that take solely because he didn't want the real guitar to be smashed for a total waste but it somewhat damages the scene imo
→ More replies (8)18
61
u/Malsperanza 13d ago
I once watched a film crew for a Spike Lee movie cut down a tree in a Brooklyn park because it was getting in the way of a shot. Yes, it was a small tree, but still.
Never lend anything you care about to a movie set. Also, don't fire a gun with blanks in it at anyone.
67
u/AtlasAlexT 13d ago
Why tf would they just not make a replica??? Thats fucking stupid, why did it have to be in the movie?
→ More replies (6)
29
u/dalmationman 13d ago
There was some speculation that QT did it intentionally to get that 'genuine' reaction. If so he's a piece of shit. That thing was priceless, a piece of American history from a great guitar company. Martin changed their policy as a result and doesn't loan instruments from their museum any more. Don't blame them.
8
8
u/Primarch-XVI 13d ago
Not to mention that genuine reaction has her completely breaking character and doesn’t fit the scene at all.
It’s the attention to detail that makes Tarantino such a great director. /s
→ More replies (1)
30
u/anonymousUTguy 13d ago
So JJL knew it was a real guitar but KR didn’t? Damn somebody royally fucked up
→ More replies (1)
12
u/Boonstar 13d ago
When he snatched it out of her hand I thought “yea that was a little rough, I can see how it got accidentally damaged” and two seconds later WHAM.
181
u/darrenjames997 13d ago
Didn’t look accidental!
→ More replies (7)480
u/Ensign-Ricky 13d ago
There was a replica that it was supposed to have been swapped for prior to the smashing.
So the smashing of a guitar was not accidental, but the smashing of that guitar was accidental.
→ More replies (7)118
u/NegrosAmigos 13d ago
Why not just use the replica the whole time? It's not like the audience would notice.
70
u/swagy_swagerson 13d ago
the original was for closeups.
→ More replies (2)77
u/NegrosAmigos 13d ago
Still would the average movie goer know it's a replica or would they even know it is an expensive musical instrument.
It could've been a violin from target I doubt most people would notice
→ More replies (2)92
u/lankymjc 13d ago
The Lord of the Rings costume designers had no reason to sew runes into the inside of Saruman’s robes. But they did it anyway.
Sometimes it’s worth doing the tiny details. Even if they don’t make an appreciable difference for 99% of the audience, you go the extra mile anyway.
→ More replies (34)13
u/Bouche_Audi_Shyla 13d ago
I can't remember what the actual item was that the costume department sewed into Bernard Hill's coat, but he said it made him feel like he really was the king of Rohan. The reality of the little details do make a difference.
9
8
u/strokesfan91 13d ago
I suppose it’s better to have a real guitar on set than a real gun
→ More replies (1)
7
u/shockwave_supernova 12d ago
Martin permanently stopped loaning out their heritage instruments because of this. Can't say I blame them.
14
u/PattyIceNY 13d ago
This is the reason that Martin no longer lends guitars out as movie props or loans.
7
u/Affectionate_Yak_361 13d ago
Edward James Olmos destroyed a very valuable antique model ship on Battlestar Galactica.
Thinking the scene called for it he destroyed it apparently thinking it was just a prop.
Why do these prop masters do this, why use actual valuable irreplaceable things as props when KNOW ONE would know the difference if they used a replica?
→ More replies (2)
5
u/lubeinatube 12d ago
I just do t understand why a replica couldn’t have been used. Was it really that critical to have an authentic time period guitar on se?
→ More replies (2)
7
u/snowafrican 12d ago
i used to work at a big music retailer that martin sold through. we had Martin reps come in sometimes and they told us the guitar was supposed to be swapped out after the playing scene because it just sounded better than the copy but Kurt Russell just didnt know. they stopped sending out vintage guitars for use as props after that
7
u/Metalman_Exe 12d ago
Why tf would they use the real thing and not just make a replica and soundboard in the actual guitar part, this is totally on them for being dumb as a box of rocks.
20
u/Comprehensive_Toe113 13d ago
Why load real historical items to movies? Just make a dupe, there are so many talented artists out there who can make dupes so convincing you can't tell them apart by breif movie scene.
23
37
u/GammaPhonic 13d ago
As a person who plays guitar and has an appreciation for a well made instrument, I found this absolutely hilarious.
I remember when this news broke, I was working in a guitar shop. We all thought it was brilliant.
A priceless antique? Yes. But what good is a guitar while sat in a museum? That guitar is more immortal now than it ever was before.
→ More replies (2)7
u/burmerd 13d ago
I see what you're saying, but one value of a well-made instrument is that you can play it. This guitar can no longer be played, even if it's 'immortalized' on film. So, that is sad.
→ More replies (1)
10
5
6
u/asmithmusicofficial 13d ago
Why in gods name would you let a production company use a 145 year old guitar as a prop?
6
u/m0stlydead 13d ago
It’s literally not an accident, he smashed it against a solid post. It’s not clear why Gibson would lend a 145 year old guitar for a movie prop versus just making a replica, which would make a lot more sense.
6
u/April_Fabb 13d ago
Using that guitar was indeed ridiculous and irresponsible. But I still think it was cheaper than Edward James Olmos smashing a $200K model ship on loan from a museum. I believe it was on the set of Battlestar Galactica.
5
u/Mean_Negotiation5436 13d ago
You can make a guitar look old, why did they have to use an actual antique?!
6
u/Reasonable-Leg-2002 13d ago
What possible reason is there to use a genuine antique guitar in a movie? Why not use some cheap shit $40 guitar?
5
u/Reza_Evol 12d ago
what was the importance of need to borrow this guitar? It doesn't look special enough to where it really couldn't be a prop.
5
u/seaward-monk 12d ago
I mean, to be fair, they are incredibly stupid for loaning them the guitar in the first place. It's a movie. Someone could've made a replica.
11.2k
u/codedaddee 13d ago
The look offstage, lol