Yesterday I went to see the opening of a new animated film called The Illusionist. It looked beautiful and the plot was soooooooooooooo slow. Feel free to miss it.
On a brighter note, I have teamed up with New Scientist to launch a new experiment testing people’s ability to predict penalties. It would be nice if you could join in by clicking here.
Tomorrow I am off to speak at an atheist conference with Richard Dawkins and James Randi in Copenhagen. Details here.
Now then, to business. I find this clip very funny, but I do wonder if there are big gender differences going on here. So, take a look and then vote….
Advertisement
June 17, 2010 at 5:58 am |
I find the video very sad actually
Poor owl.
June 17, 2010 at 9:00 am
Ditto.
June 17, 2010 at 11:00 am
I agree… Everyone that thinks this is funny is bad people… Its not funny to see a cute owl that gets beaten up… That poor owl could have died. I tought it was just a little funny when it tried to hit the first time, but missed, that was more like: Hah, stupid monkey…
But then the monkey actualy hits the owl so it get knocked off the place it stands, and right into the ground? Poor owl…
June 17, 2010 at 1:26 pm
Definitely not funny. What we would find abhorrent if a human did it suddenly becomes funny when a chimpanzee does it. It’s natural, and to be expected, but funny? Not so much. Just an example of poor planning and animal handling.
June 20, 2010 at 2:41 am
“Cute owl” is anthropomorphism. This is predator vs prey, and the clip is great. One nasty, nippy bird of prey vs one nasty, attitudinal proto-hominid = INSTANT COMEDY!
Neither was hurt, the human was surprised, it was funny.
Grow up — we’re only here for the ride, and we might as well enjoy it!
June 17, 2010 at 6:32 am |
How focused Monkey was on his goal and achieved his aim. Its interesting.
June 17, 2010 at 7:31 am |
I think your poll might get skewd by males and females answerIng the other genders question in order to see the others results.
Video is a tragic but slightly amusing – too me. Funny that the guy is failing to control the animals. But when it finishes it freezes on the last frame for a second and it kind of looks like the guy is smerking at the owl being clobbered. That leaves a bad taste.
June 17, 2010 at 8:39 am
You can check the results without answering the question
June 17, 2010 at 10:10 am
gosh it’s the same thing every single time. You can see the results by clicking on ‘View Results’.
June 20, 2010 at 2:43 am
“Tragic” my ass. BP pouring crude into the Gulf because of human greed = tragic. A monkey dope-slapping an owl = ROFLMFAO.
June 17, 2010 at 7:54 am |
Was mesmerized by pareidolic reel-to-reel.
June 17, 2010 at 8:26 am |
Female and find it disturbing. Not keen on animals being used in that way.
June 17, 2010 at 3:34 pm
same. With some of the clips you posted previously, I could see how other people might find them funny even if I didn’t. In this case, it’s just not funny in any way. Unexpected maybe, but not funny.
June 17, 2010 at 8:35 am |
it’s not only funny it’s kinda fascinating
June 17, 2010 at 8:41 am |
it’s not funny to me.
June 17, 2010 at 8:50 am |
Hilarious!! I laughed loudly – the monkey just went and whacked the owl one, the sheer bluntness of the action was brilliant.
June 17, 2010 at 8:56 am |
I saw this video within the last week or so and actually thought I saw it here. Hmm… must’ve been some some other site. The first time I saw the video I found it very funny so that is how I voted.
June 17, 2010 at 9:04 am |
I feel sorry for that poor owl.
But of more interest to me are the poll options:
Very funny
Quite funny
Not at all funny
Two “enhanced” positives and one complete negative. That’s like asking if you “Completely agree”, “Very much agree”, or “Completely disagree”.
Perhaps:
Funny (or Very funny)
Neutral (or Mildly funny)
Not funny
June 17, 2010 at 10:35 am
There is only one “enhanced” positive. The word “quite” can mean either “moderately” or “very”, depending on inflection and context. In this context it clearly means “moderately”.
Apparently, using “quite” to mean “very” is more common in America, whereas using “quite” to mean “moderately” is more common in Britain. (Source: http://separatedbyacommonlanguage.blogspot.com/2008/07/quite.html )
June 17, 2010 at 1:29 pm
In American English, “quite” is just a poor stylistic choice. It adds nothing and should usually be omitted, like in this case. Maybe adding extra words to fluff up your prose is more appropriate in the UK.
June 17, 2010 at 4:22 pm
@Flesh-eating Dragon Even allowing for the “separated by a common language” factor, putting “quite” was unnecessary for clarity. Even as a Brit, Prof Wiseman could have easily said just “funny”.
June 17, 2010 at 9:20 am |
I thought it was very funny how the guy was having trouble handling the animals. But felt very sorry for the owl right at the end!
June 17, 2010 at 9:40 am |
I’m male and I laughed, but it also serves to remind me how much I miss Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom.
June 17, 2010 at 9:49 am |
Not funny to even the slightest degree.
But then, I’m well known in my house for being able to sit through one of those “Funniest Home Videos” programs without smiling or laughing.
I guess seeing other animals being hurt is just not in my repertoire of funny.
June 17, 2010 at 10:30 am |
Used to watch that show all the time….sorry folks I thought it was funny…I know …I know…I love my critters….I really do and I see my wild ones messing with each other all the time….you should see how my raccoons and opossums smack each other around and they aren’t hurting each other…there just a pecking order….my pet chicken would keep all the others in line….and the owl…..has very, very sharp talons and beak….don’t think for one minute that it could not have hurt the monkey too….bet they knew each other well…..do miss that show….
June 17, 2010 at 12:41 pm
That looks like a Barred Owl…not 100% sure mind you…note too the gentleman is gloved …..to see an up close one to get a gander at the size of talons and beak I’ll try to put a link…lol…not the greatest on doing this so hope it works.
http://birdladybydayakalilabyrd.wordpress.com/2009/05/23/entry-for-may-23-2009-we-had-a-new-visitor/
June 17, 2010 at 1:07 pm |
I heard that the UFC is looking for that monkey…
June 17, 2010 at 2:09 pm |
The video’s title, “Monkey attacks owl” had me anxious before I even started watching.
I also wonder if being warned that Richard is looking for gender biases predisposed me to finding it NOT funny (to be “better” that the guys) ?
Maybe I would have reacted differently if he’d just said “Watch this,” and shown a version without clues as to what was going to happen, then written more after the break.
June 17, 2010 at 2:39 pm |
As a guy, I found it not so funny. Though, I might have if I knew the owl was OK.
It’s like slapstick. I like the Three Stooges, but if I saw somebody recreating an eye poke, I would cringe if I didn’t know if the people knew what they were doing.
My wife might like it if she didn’t find the owl too upsetting. She REALLY doesn’t like owls. I’d say, its almost as bad as here fear of snakes.
June 17, 2010 at 3:28 pm |
You need a button for “funny and horrifying at the same time.”
The punch was unexpected, petty and cartoony (funny), but I also found myself worrying about the owl: (Was he going to be okay? That wasn’t fair that they put him in danger to begin with etc…)
I realized this will sound crazy to some people…
June 17, 2010 at 8:29 pm
Agreed. I let out a bark of laughter when the chimp got that final swipe in because, as someone else pointed out, it seemed staged like a Three Stooges stunt. But then I immediately became worried for the owl.
June 18, 2010 at 9:06 am
I agree. I do find slapstick humor funny, without really liking it. I always laugh, but with real people and animals involved I’ve also got my heart in my mouth, worrying that they’re okay…
June 17, 2010 at 6:08 pm |
I did not find the clip to be funny at all. That’s not to say I don’t like unprovoked animal fights though. Especially when they contains a cat, a dog and a roobma: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf9wHkkNGUU
June 18, 2010 at 11:39 am
Z thank you for the link that is funny and brought a tear to my eyes too…..the cat looks just like my Nicky that died many years ago….one of two that I had when I started out on my own…miss that cat…..
June 17, 2010 at 6:09 pm |
Its side-splittingly funny until you stop to think that Mr. Mook most likely wants to eat the owl.
After that I found it DIFFERENTLY funny: we forget that chimpanzees can be hunters when the chimpanzee is a cuddly toy in a yellow overall. Here’s the ernest presenter with his message of playing nicely together and then the fluffy owl just gets WHACKED. er, sorry children, your furry friends are exposed as sometimes red in tooth and claw. Nasty nightmares and cuddly toys abandoned across the land.
Also when you’re watching it you know something has got to happen after the first grab, but its still a surprise when the owl gets WHACKED. My physical reaction was indeed a nervous guffaw.
So in this case I doubt its my gender (I’m some kind of woman i suppose) so much as this particular knowledge of chimpanzees. So i dunno Dr. Wiseman, isn’t it rather more complicated than funny/not?
June 17, 2010 at 6:16 pm |
Oh and the link in Z’s comment – the roobma cat – that i giggled at all the way through.
June 17, 2010 at 9:44 pm |
Female. Very funny, but it also shows why people shouldn’t keep wild animals as fluffy little companions OR pretend chimps are human (chimps in human outfits sort of piss me off). The fact that the guy can’t control the animals is what makes it funny, in an ironic sort of way.
June 18, 2010 at 5:30 am
I think you are right about the older gentleman he was always so very proper on this show…..and it was a show from the ’60s and keeping these kinds of animals as pets was very big then too. This was a weekly show and as a kid I never missed one. Chimps were dressed like humans especially on shows like this and at that time because they did have so many “human” like behaviors and to show them “without” clothes seemed to make people uncomfortable…..after all at that same time on TV shows married people were shown to sleep in separate twin beds!
June 20, 2010 at 2:04 am
I agree with you 100% that people shouldn’t keep monkies for pets. The average person wouldn’t have the knowledge or understanding to be able to offer the best care for the animal. And people also forget that they can be very dangerous. Anyone who doubts or scoffs at that can Google Charla Nash, the woman who was savagely attacked by a friend’s pet chimp.
This story actually hits a bit close to home, as my cousin was recently attacked by a monkey while she was travelling abroad and visiting a nature preserve (NOT to be confused with a zoo… these were wild animals so there was no way of knowing if they were disease-free). The guides had tourists pose for photos with baby monkies and, unfortunately, while my cousin was getting her picture taken, the mother monkey came out of the forest and attacked her. Though she wasn’t very seriously injured, the monkey did bit her leg and clamp down quite hard. Injury aside, we were quite concerned about what kind of diseases the monkey could have been carrying. She had to have numerous rabie shots and herpes shots (which were both painful and unbelievably expensive) while away, and is getting blood tests done to make sure there is nothing else to worry about.
Bottom line: any animal, even someone’s pet cat or dog, can act unpredictably and become dangerous. People should always be aware of this and always have a plan to protect themselves.
June 17, 2010 at 10:37 pm |
[...] Stuff and monkey video « Richard Wiseman's Blog [...]
June 18, 2010 at 4:46 am |
Schadenfreude is the word for taking pleasure in other’s pain.
I don’t find anything funny about this, nor people getting hurt, etc. I feel badly for the victim, having no desire to laugh at their misery.
I imagine the gender separation isn’t nearly as significant as if you separated responses based upon how empathic each respondent is.
June 18, 2010 at 7:01 am |
Now what I find interesting is that at the time of this posting 52% of females and 67% of males voting have found it funny in some fashion but the majority of the posting is from those that did not find it funny. The first few posts were very much against the video. So is there some form of peer pressure keeping some from posting that they found this funny? I know I voted before looking at how the voting was going and when I can to post and read the first few post I had to set aside some mildly uncomfortable feelings of guilt at finding this video funny. So I wonder if anyone else thinks there may be something to this idea?
Now I would never condone animal cruelty and I think what made it funny to me is that I knew about this show and the era in which it was made and that the animals and their keepers worked together…..these animal were familiar with each other and I saw it more like kids taking a swipe at each other…..and really the owl could give as good as it got too! But must go now as I see the Friday Puzzle should be posted!
Yes I just made an excuse for thinking it funny….see what I mean! …lol…
June 18, 2010 at 8:05 am |
I didn’t vote because there was no category that could really capture my response properly. I commented instead.
June 18, 2010 at 10:31 am |
I found the build-up funny. It was all funny until the actual violence.
I love slapstick but it is usually staged (so you know no-one was hurt) or it involves people who should know better and consented to the risk of harm.
I like to see BMX jumps etc that go wrong on youtube, if only because it underlines the bravery and skill that is involved when it does go right.
However, this film ended without resolution – I actually gasped when the owl was hit. my first thought was “good god, I hope the owl is alright” and then the video stopped, leaving me wondering.
There is a slightly ‘gladiatorial’ edge to this kind of voyeurism.
However, please don’t think that I am judging those who found it funny.
This is just my brain, not theirs, and I am sure you can be a rounded and balanced individual and still find this funny.
I did not read many posts before contributing, so I don’t think I am responding to peer pressure, but I could be kidding myself…
June 18, 2010 at 10:40 am |
BTW, I enjoy boxing and think that UFC is no different to any martial art.
It is all about consent.
Skiing is pretty dangerous – why doesn’t that get the same attention as UFC? Because it is graceful?
What about the Shaolin Monks?
Humans are funny creatures, we have so many weird cultural norms and mores about violent behaviour.
It is similar to British people complaining that some Asian cultures eat dogs and then going to Tescos to buy a battery chicken or some Danish pork. Which animal has suffered most? It is debatable…
We accept that which is generally accepted by the majority and then concoct an explanation afterwards to provide ethical justification.
It takes a strong mind to discard the teachings of your mother culture and look instead for a greater truth…
Unfortunately I am a weak-willed carnivorous hypocrite.
June 18, 2010 at 11:20 am |
Also btw Richard, I hope you are not going to quote the results of this poll in any serious scientific study or journal such as New Scientist, given that the sampling is utterly biased – (people with access to the internet and time to waste who happened to stumble across your blog)
June 18, 2010 at 11:50 am
Hey tigger don’t forget to add me and my short term memory deficit and dain bramage to the mix…..I obviously have way too much spare time…..lol….and totally mess up the results!
June 18, 2010 at 3:45 pm |
I found it funny the first time it took a swipe, and less funny as it went on. I didn’t find it funny ha ha it was more shock and whoa
June 18, 2010 at 4:15 pm |
I found it quite funny for the fact that the host had too much going on at once to keep it all under control.
What I strongly object to is when blooper shows think they have to make it funnier by adding sound effects as they did in this case. If a clip is funny in its own right then it shouldn’t need them. So I object to the blatant audience manipulation to try to draw out a bigger laugh. I’m so conscious of it these days that I’d say such gimmicks in fact diminish my reaction.
My idea of what rates as very funny is something more like this:
Chick Terrified Of Horses
June 18, 2010 at 8:28 pm |
Both my husband and I found it funny but my three daughters ( aged 11,8,6) found it very disturbing!
June 19, 2010 at 7:51 am |
[...] Stuff and monkey video « Richard Wiseman's Blog [...]
June 20, 2010 at 1:43 am |
During the begining part, I thought that the monkey was simply trying to touch or pet the owl and was being too rough. Then when the monkey actually got ahold of the owl, I thought that it was horrible, and I hope that poor owl wasn’t too seriously hurt.
But this did give me a couple of interesting thoughts. First of all, are we sure that this was an actual attack ie: that the monkey intentionally meant to cause harm? When I read the word “attack”, I was expecting something more vicious and extreme. Perhaps my initial thought was right… the monkey was curious, went to pet the owl, misjudged its own strength and inadvertedly slapped the owl off of its perch. Either way, poor owl!
Secondly, given how old that video is, both the owl and the monkey must be long dead by now. Its interesting how so many people feel for two animals long after their death, simply by watching a brief video clip about them.
June 20, 2010 at 5:47 pm |
It wasn’t surprising or funny, it’s so predictable. I fully expected the curious behaviour of the monkey, many animals are like that, it’s just troublesome to deal with, I supposed.
June 21, 2010 at 12:51 am |
I find it neither funny or disturbing like so many here found it. Just not amusing or emotionally moving in any direction. If I were to find pitty, it would be for the host who was obviously having issues in keeping the situation under control.
If you find it disturbing, then you forget the natural instincts of these animals. It’s very expected that the monkey would find the owl as something to attack. In the wild these two animals would be anything but friendly.
If you find it funny, well then you should re-examine your own insticts. Maybe you belong in the wild too?
June 21, 2010 at 12:46 pm |
I laughed a lot. sure poor owl but i dont think it got hurt…those beasts are tough – a simple slap from a chimp wont hurt it. but it was still funny as hell. “everyone who finds this funny is bad” wrote somebody above. get a grip.
June 24, 2010 at 9:49 am |
Put me down for male and ‘just doesn’t want his finding it funny to misconstrued as implying that the clip was funny but only that the last second or so was so uncontrolled as to raise a small smile, but all within the context of a sad reminder of how innocent the scene seems against the disaster of species extinctions that are happening now at an accelerating pace.”
July 2, 2010 at 5:53 pm |
Felt sorry for the owl, but it was still funny, and I laughed. One doesn’t exclude the other.
July 4, 2010 at 12:38 am |
It’s a good idea to hand sanitizer to carry with you at all times. When you meet someone who wants to keep the baby, you can always ask to use the first vacuum cleaner. Most people will understand and enjoyable. Take baby wipes with you so you can wipe the baby’s face and hands after someone touches him.
Be aware of anyone who sounds like a cold or sniffles. You are only to protect your toddler.
November 8, 2010 at 3:51 am |
Get The Key Secrets To Quickly Elevate Your Vertical Leap Over One Foot In Less Than 90 Days Here!