So you will feel cheated if, on watching the programme, you see a much loved husband and father slipping into a coma from which he never awakened rather than taking his last breath ?
I fail to see the difference, personally. I'd rather focus on the slow and dreadful decline of a devoted and talented family man losing all that he had to a devastating disease and being willing to let us travel with him.
To sulk because you have been deprived of seeing his 'true' final moment is beneath you, surely ?
The situation was not fictitious.......a little premature, perhaps. But to claim that the widow 'milked it' is a jibe too far. As her husband slipped into that coma, she knew that he had gone..........her grief and tears were not false. She had lost the man she'd loved and cared for...........the fact that his heart carried on beating for two further days is really neither here nor there. When she was talking about his death can you really split hairs as to when this occured ?
So, We've got one lot of folks up in arms because his death was filmed, another lot up in arms because it wasn't, and yet another lot having a hissy-fit because they were told it had when it actually hadn't............?
I've been trying to give a flying f**k about this all day............haven't managed it so far !
I believe that the programme makers spent the last year of this mans life filming his demise in order to highlight this dreadful conditon.This was at the families behest.
To feel cheated you arent going to see the last breath this man took beggars belief.
I dont believe at all there was any intention to dupe anyyone and sadly the widow has had to come out and defend herself and the object of the documentary -all because of 'complaints', it was rigged.How very sad.
Silly person , you are missing the point. I do not want to see him die, I have experience of that with my family.
The point is , on the radio 2 show , there were religious people, journalists, lots of folk. The wife was saying ..the film shows my husband at point of death, IT WAS A CON.
Why do you have a problem with this.
The discussion was pointless as the whole thing was a fake.
i understand your point doc - yes they should not have faked something so serious...however you would be surprised at just how much is preprepared for tv footage - a great many apparently impromptu moments have not only been planned but repeated and filmed from different angles etc.
i have twice seen moment of death footage on tv, in both the person was in such a state there was no way it could have been faked.
in this instance I expect he had lived longer than they expected and they were not sure how much longer he'd hang on for and perhaps simply couldn't afford to keep a crew there 24 7 to catch the exact moment - do you know how much crew and equipment cost per day and night?
perhaps also she just decided the final moment was too much for her to bear in the presence of a film crew.
i agree she should not have lied - but really, he still died, every thing you saw did actually happen for real - just two days later - she did not fake events, she just faked the footage shown.
getting angry about a minor detail is kind of missing the whole point of the documentary.
Spock, I know exactly the point you are trying to make. There was a heart-wrenching (?) interview on the Today programme this morning about it. At the root of all our behaviour is the mantra 'what's in it for me ?'