See how I'm using the audio clip above? ...I came across the following little nugget by chance and I really don't know where to put it, so the empty section of audio clips seemed as good as any. It's about Sharks, kind of.
20 Movies and TV Shows Where Stunt Actors Died During Filming
https://www.newsweek.com/movies-tv-show ... ng-1611943
I was reading the above article, when the Burt Reynolds film "Shark!" caught my eye. I had to look up Jose Marco, a stunt man who allegedly was killed by a shark during filming in Manzanillo, Mexico, 1967.
Shark!, aka Hai, USA/Mexiko, 1969, Regie: Samuel Fuller, Darsteller: Sylvia Pinal, Burt Reynolds.
While most films that suffered tragedies would like to distance themselves from fatalities, 1969 Burt Reynolds action film Shark! did the opposite.
Originally called Caine, the film changed its name to Shark! after a stuntman was killed by a white shark during filming. Jose Marco, was attacked and killed on camera by a white shark that broke through protective netting.
The poster for the movie read "A realistic film became too real!" and promoted a Life magazine photo spread of the attack.
Director Samuel Fuller battled with producers to have his name removed from the project after he saw Marco's death being used to promote it.
That narrative screams fake, doesn't it? ...Who would use a real death of an employee to sell a product? ...Was it quickly decided the film was so bad, it needed some notoriety to get people to watch it?
Well I checked by TOMATOMETER and found this page, it has the 44 top ranked shark films, and "Shark!" only made it to the introductory paragraph. So maybe that confirms it was not a good one.
BEST SHARK MOVIES RANKED BY TOMATOMETER
https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/gu ... matometer/
You’re gonna need a bigger screen. But that’s only if you want to take in the full awesome glory of earth’s bitiest avenger: the shark! It’s the only apex predator we humans have cleared time from our busy schedule to pay humble tribute to (we’ve certainly never heard of Sperm Whale Week), Rotten Tomatoes likewise took the time to put together our list of the best shark movies (and the worst) ever — all ranked by Tomatometer.
Our love/hate cinematic relationship with sharks began with directing legend Samuel Fuller and his aptly titled Shark! in 1969, a movie which effectively killed his career for a decade, until 1980’s The Big Red One. Here was a lesson most people would take wisdom from (sharks, even the ones you make up, are not to be trifled with), but it takes a certain cavalier breed to make it as a director, forging ahead where others spectacularly failed.
Now I've got to admit, I would have let this one pass by if it wasn't for the inclusion of LIFE Magazine in this next article about "Shark!".
STUNTMAN SHARK DEATH: HORRIFIC TRAGEDY OR SICK MOVIE PUBLICITY STUNT?
https://thedailyjaws.com/blog/stuntman- ... city-stunt
Based on the Willam Canning book ‘His Bones Are Coral’, 1969’s “Shark!” tells the story of a gunrunner (Burt Reynolds) losing his cargo near a small coastal Sudanese town so he's stuck there. When a woman hires him to raid a sunken ship in the shark-infested waters, he sees a chance to compensate for his losses. He's not the only one.
Co-written and directed by Samuel Fuller, ‘Shark!’ was a Mexico-American co-production, with filming taking place for nine weeks in 1967, in Manzanillo, Mexico, which stood in for the Sudan. Jose Marco was hired as Burt Reynold’s stunt double to shoot some of the underwater, shark sequences. It would be his last job.
No official account exists on the exact circumstances and events that lead to Jose Marco’s death, however differing versions of what happened have emerged. Some claim a great white shark broke into the enclosure where they were filming (off the coast of Mexico) and devoured the unfortunate stunt diver.
So this is where LIFE Magazine steps in with its article prior to the film's release.
‘A realistic film became too real!’ - Life Magazine
Others state that a shark used in filming was improperly sedated and took Mr. Marcos life (by all accounts this is the most credible version of what happened).
Seizing the publicity Jose’s ‘on-set death’ had brought the production, the studio changed the film’s original titles of ‘Caine!’ to ‘Shark!’ Sharks feature very little in the actual movie. Producers allegedly used the footage of his ' death in the opening scene in the movie although this is unconfirmed. This caused director Samuel Fuller to quit and disown the film entirely.
When Fuller saw the version that was released to theaters, he said it had been butchered so badly in editing that it was no longer recognizable as his film. He demanded that his name be taken off of it, but the producers refused.
IMDB lists ‘Shark!” as Jose Marco’s only screen credit
According to "Life" Magazine, which did a story in 1968 on the filming, Marco was in the water in scuba gear alongside a subdued bull shark when a great white managed to make it through the nets protecting the area from the rest of the sea. It charged at the camera crew before launching at Marco and disemboweling him where he swam. Crew members tried to steer the shark away from Marco with spears, but the animal was undeterred, and the stuntman's injuries were so severe that he later died at a hospital.
However, a detailed investigation revealed that there was no official record of the attack, no record of a stuntman named Jose Marco, and no hospital records of the incident, although Marco was allegedly in a hospital for two days before he died. "Life" had no comment.
Jose Marco would have been just 32 years old at the time of the incident.
Not 33 then. And this is the apparent clip...those brave cameramen, didn't even flinch when the shark killed their work mate.
Shark : le mangeur d'hommes (Shark!) - Samuel Fuller - 1969
This is the part that answered my question before I even asked it...on searching for Jose Marco I found the next article...so we can guess where LIFE Magazine got that name...but why exactly was the story created?
Jose Marco: Philippine history's greatest con man
https://www.pilipino-express.com/histor ... marco.html
It is no secret that over the past century Filipino history books have been riddled with errors and outright hoaxes, especially in the area of the pre-Hispanic period. After more than 300 years of Spanish rule, Filipinos had many blank spots in their collective memory concerning their pre-colonial past. At the beginning of the 1900s, the new American regime helped to regain some of these lost memories through new research, which was fuelled by the post-revolution nationalism of the Filipinos and the Americans’ curiosity about their new possession. However, some of these over-enthusiastic efforts to resurrect the past led to sloppy historical research on both sides. Often, a basic talent for forgery was hardly even needed to fool the “experts.”
Perhaps the most famous hoax was that of Datu Kalantiaw, the first Filipino lawmaker. It was wildly successful for 50 years before anybody seriously questioned its validity, even though the perpetrator of the hoax was probably one of the most inept frauds in history – José E. Marco.
Jose E. Marco in a photo circa 1950s
The forgeries of José E. Marco were extremely crude, almost childish in execution and full of absurd stories, anachronisms, contradictions and errors. Marco’s career as a phoney historian apparently began in 1912 while he was working for the post office in Negros Occidental. He published a Historical Review of the Island of Negros in the Spanish language journal, Renacimiento Filipino (Filipino Renaissance) where he cited several unknown authors and mentioned meaningless pre-colonial dates, which he did not connect to any particular events or calendars. These idiosyncrasies would become Marco’s trademark for every one of his alleged discoveries in the following 50 years.
At the time, Marco’s essay was not particularly remarkable but it would later become significant for what was not in it. Marco didn’t mention any lawmaker by the name of Kalantiaw and one of the footnotes even said that there were no lords or kings in the pre-colonial Philippines, and that crimes went unpunished. This may have slipped his mind when, years later, he told the famous anthropologist, H. Otley Beyer, that his father had discovered the Kalantiaw documents in 1899 while looting the convent in Himamaylan, Negros – 13 years before he wrote his essay in 1912. Marco changed his story, though, when the University of Chicago requested details of his discoveries in 1954. He said that an old cook, not his father, had stolen the documents and then sold them to Marco in 1913.
In 1912, Marco also donated to the Philippine Library and Museum some ancient documents written in baybayin script on three sheets of tree bark. Marco told a schoolteacher named Luther Parker that he had found them wrapped in wax inside the horns of a wooden six-legged bull-shaped idol in a cave near La Castellana, Negros Occidental. Parker visited the cave a few weeks later in December 1912 and found that the only bull there was the story itself. Yet, according to a Philippine Library bulletin in September the following year, these were “the greatest literary find ever made in the Philippine Islands.”
Kalantiaw “discovered”
Marco made his biggest splash in academics in 1914 when he delivered five manuscripts to the Philippine Library. Over 800 pages were forged in total, which would have been an astounding feat except that they were literally scrawled with hardly any effort to make the writing look authentic or to make the information consistent with known history – or even with common sense. Nevertheless, the director of the library, Dr. James A. Robertson, received the documents and called them “important additions” to their collection and he referred to Marco as “a good friend to the institution.”
Among the documents was Marco’s magnum opus of forgeries, Las Antiguas Leyendes de la Isla de Negros (The Ancient Legends of the Island of Negros). The book, which alone was over 600 pages in two leather bound volumes, was dedicated to the king of Spain in August 1839 – a period when Spain had no king. Leyendes was the book that gave us the myth of Datu Kalantiaw and his list of bizarre and sadistic laws that included Spanish-derived words like oras almost a full century before any Spaniard had set foot in the Philippines. Yet, to this day, some members of the Philippine Supreme Court still believe that Kalantiaw is one of the earliest and greatest lawmakers of the nation.
I was interested to see when the fraud was uncovered, and guess what, look at the dates?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_E._Marco
Jose E. Marco was a Filipino writer and forger who created some of the most infamous hoaxes and forgeries relating to Philippine history, producing artifacts purported to have come from the pre-colonial and Spanish eras such as the Code of Kalantiaw, touted as the first law code in the Philippines, and La Loba Negra, a novel supposedly written by Filipino proto-nationalist priest Jose Burgos which became part of the country's educational curriculum for decades...
...After the Second World War, Marco continued to come up with precolonial artefacts and writings by Filipino national heroes. Among these was La Loba Negra (The Black She-wolf), a novel purportedly written by Filipino proto-nationalist priest Jose Burgos, who was executed by the Spanish for purported involvement in the Cavite Mutiny in 1872, and was among 45 supposed works by Burgos that he claimed to have discovered in the 1960s. La Loba Negra was subsequently turned into a play by Virginia Moreno in 1969 titled The Onyx Wolf and an opera by Francisco Feliciano with libretto by Fides Cuyugan-Asensio in 1984.
Exposure
Around the 1960s, bibliographer Mauro Garcia, who was an initial believer and collector of Marco's discoveries, gradually became suspicious of their provenance. He discussed his suspicions with American historian and long-time Philippine researcher William Henry Scott, who then formally denounced Marco in his 1969 work Prehispanic source materials for the study of Philippine history. Further denunciations were made by Jesuit scholars Miguel Bernad and John Schumacher, which prevented the further publication of Burgos' supposed manuscripts.
Aftermath
The unmasking of Marco's hoaxes led to a gradual decline in attention to his works, with the National Historical Institute ordering the withdrawal of official recognition of the Code of Kalantiaw in 2004. Historian and former NHI Chair Ambeth Ocampo compared the dissemination and usage of Marco's works in historical research to stumbling upon "land mines". Nevertheless, some Filipino history textbooks continue to present it as historical fact.
I find it interesting the Jesuit scholars Miguel Bernad and John Schumacher only denounced Jose Marco after William Henry Scott published his 1969 book...I can't help thinking the best form of defence is attack...because apparently they then had the power to "prevented the further publication of Burgos' supposed manuscripts".
The film named "Shark!"...that wasn't about a shark.
Shark! | Full Classic Movie In Color HD | Action Adventure | Burt Reynolds
A gunrunner loses his cargo near a small coastal Sudanese town so he's stuck there. When a woman hires him to raid a sunken ship in the shark-infested waters, he sees a chance to compensate for his losses. He's not the only one.*
1969. Stars: Burt Reynolds, Arthur Kennedy, Barry Sullivan
This film has been altered and restored from its original copyright by The Cinema Trust and licensed from Framerate Technologies LLC. All rights reserved.
It's just dawned on me; it is definitely the Jesuits behind Jose Marco's faked Philippine history...of course it is, why would we think any differently?
Lets step back to 1967; the Jesuits have eyes everywhere in the media, and they get wind that historian William Henry Scott is preparing to produce a book that will expose Jose Marco as a Filipino history faker, and it's due to be published around 1968-69. ...Suddenly a completely different Jose Marco dies in a shark attack on the set of some movie production in '67 and 'LIFE Magazine' is used to sensationalise it in an article in '68 in the run up to the film being released just coincidentally at the exact same time the William Henry Scott book is due to be published. It is safe to assume this was a stunt designed to drown out the impact across the general population of the claims made in Scott's book. The Jesuit hierarchy looked for a film that was in production where they could shoehorn in a scandal about a man called Jose Marco...it is a form of chaff to derail and confuse the issue at hand, and they do it all the time...ABSOLUTELY ALL OF THE TIME.
They settle on a fatal shark attack where a stuntman is killed during filming of an underwater sequence. They "pay" the producers of the movie to renamed the film "Shark!". They also create a back-story about the film being originally titled "Caine" until the untimely death of Jose Marco, where upon in a seemingly crass decision to capitalised on the publicity surrounding the death, they change the name from "Caine" to "Shark!" and also sell the idea it contains the sequence where the stuntman is killed. This then gives the entire Jesuit run media a reason to talk about the unfortunate and untimely death of the brave Jose Marco and not the Filipino fake history maker Jose Marco.
I very much doubt the film was originally called Caine, or that the name of the lead character was originally called Caine. ...No, it seems more likely to also be an insert, the calling card of the Jesuits to say, "We were here!".
Clearly the director Samuel Fuller was incensed the way they used the film, whether he knew the death was real or fake. He apparently "battled with producers to have his name removed from the project after he saw Marco's death being used to promote it". This could be part of the story, but if the movie did "effectively kill his career for a decade", it would suggest it wasn't the movie that killed his career, it was him trying to get his name removed from the project by stating someone else cut the film together and not him. Would that not be one of his main jobs as the director, to decide on the final cut?
Then after the publication of William Henry Scott's book, two Jesuit scholars, Miguel Bernad and John Schumacher, are charged with guiding the narrative by sounding their own denunciations and then "preventing the further publication of Burgos' supposed manuscripts"...maybe with the idea to reintroduce the same claims from another source many years in the future, when the whole sorry story of the Jose E. Marco incident has been successfully memory-holed.
Below, a short list of false history attributed to Jose Marco.
https://www.pilipino-express.com/histor ... marco.html
A reign of error
So little is known about Marco today that it’s hard to tell if his mistakes were due to stupidity, laziness, or just plain contempt for the experts who eagerly accepted his forgeries – or perhaps he really believed what he wrote. His blunders are too numerous to mention them all here, but some were absolute whoppers. Here are a few:
The historian E.D. Hester wrote to Marco in 1954 and pressed him to explain the contradictions in one of his latest alleged discoveries. Marco wrote back and said that he was not familiar with the historical details of the book in question and, like Hester, he could not understand its author’s confusion, either. Apparently Marco tried to buy Hester’s silence on the matter by enclosing a gift of four extremely rare and valuable wartime postage stamps. But this didn’t fool Hester because he had worked in the very government department that had issued the special stamps and he knew at a glance that Marco’s stamps were worthless fakes.
- The oldest document that Marco allegedly discovered was supposedly written in the year 1137, yet it mentioned that Kalantiaw had built a fort on Negros in 1433!
- A pre-colonial Visayan document, written in 1489, contained the Spanish words viernes (Friday) and régulo (petty king)” and it mentioned King Charles V who was not born until 1500. It is highly unlikely that anyone in the Philippines had met a Spaniard by that time, much less learned his language.
- A Spanish document said to be written in 1577 mentioned trade relations with Indonesia even though that name for the archipelago was not coined until 1877.
- Then, there was the 1572 map of Negros that showed the location of three churches at a time when there were no churches or even a single priest on the island.
- The same map showed distances measured in leagues that were equal to kilometres – even though the kilometre was not invented until 1799 (a detail found in several Marco forgeries).
- Marco’s pre-colonial calendars had a seven-day week just like in Europe, though early authentic Spanish accounts reported that Filipinos had no such thing.
- One comment about one of the calendars, supposedly written in 1837, used the word microbe, which was not coined until 1878.
- The calendars also featured pre-colonial baybayin writing, which, like all of Marco’s discoveries, was obviously written by someone who spoke Spanish and did not understand the baybayin script because the words followed Spanish spelling rules.
Marco’s interests were not restricted to pre-colonial history. The historian John Schumacher exposed about 40 Marco forgeries related to or attributed to Jose Burgos, one of the three priests, now national heroes, who were martyred in 1872. These included an 1873 account of the Burgos trial and the novel La Loba Negra, which Burgos himself had supposedly written in 1869. Schumacher was able to produce side-by-side comparisons of Burgos’ authentic signature and handwriting with the sloppy penmanship and poor Spanish of Jose Marco. (Hardly a single paragraph was left without a profusion of corrections when Senator Claro M. Recto edited a typewritten copy of the novel in the 1940s.) Schumacher also revealed the same kinds of absurd anachronisms that the historian W.H. Scott had found in his examination of Marco's pre-colonial fakes. He too noted that the alleged Burgos documents also had distances stated in leagues that were equal to kilometres.
These are only a few of the innumerable hoaxes in Marco's 50-year career as a fraud and many more are bound to be uncovered.
A 1969 film named "Shark!"...that wasn't about a shark...or was it?