Home Made Star Wars Movie Injury 734
SaleNowOn writes "Rather than use expensive cgi techniques to make the light sabres glow for their home movie. This couple instead used fluorescent tubes filled with petrol.
Which they then set alight.
If they don't survive they must be Future Darwin Award winners. It makes me proud to be British." And me embarassed to be a Star Wars geek.
Better link on BBC (Score:5, Informative)
The whole tiny acticle ... (Score:1, Informative)
Slightly more information (Score:5, Informative)
NB : Before you make any cheap cracks, the people involved are seriously injured.
Saberology (Score:4, Informative)
The Grammar Nazi Strikes Back (Score:2, Informative)
C'mon, Slashdot editors, do your job and edit. It looks really stupid when the first "sentence" in the first article posted on the Main page is actually a sentence fragment. Have some pride.
Re:Better link on BBC (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Copy Cat'ing (Score:3, Informative)
From the Sun Online article ... (Score:1, Informative)
RTFA (Score:2, Informative)
Napalm? (Score:5, Informative)
"They filled them with fuel and washing-up liquid to act out a Jedi Knight fight scene from new movie Revenge Of The Sith. "
Gas + soap may make a crude napalm [wikipedia.org]
Re:Slightly more information (Score:3, Informative)
I know what I'm talking about... they hurt like nothing you can imagine.
They hurt, and hurt, and hurt, and hurt some more, and then even more. It's just undescribable.
Pray that your superior genes and sheer luck preserve you from such injuries, they destroy your world.
Genii (Score:3, Informative)
They should of used these... (Score:2, Informative)
My cousin has a pair of these, and my wife and I checked them out about a week ago. He paid about 99$US each at a chain movie store. This would have covered their visuals and their sound effects (at least so much as you would need for a home movie). And, according to the guys at ThinkGeek, they will hold up to some small-scale combat.
200$US has to be less expensive than their medical bills will be...
Re:Which they then set alight? (Score:3, Informative)
And it says this where, exactly?
Why would you fill a tube with petrol if you weren't intending to set it alight?
Why would you end up in a specialist burns unit if the petrol hadn't got lit?
Re:Better link on BBC (Score:3, Informative)
For all its faults, the UK does allow - and even encourage - a far greater degree of eccentricity than most other countries.
Re:Slightly more information (Score:3, Informative)
Real napalm is originally a soap and gasoline.
Sodium (Na) palmitate --> Na-palm, which is a detergent still used today in some soaps.
Although I've heard about aluminum salts being used as well.
Re:Ed Wood had better dialog than Lucas! (Score:4, Informative)
Fiberoptic Lightsabers (Score:5, Informative)
The problem with the segmented plastic lightsabers you can buy is (A) they're weak as fuck and you can't fight with them, (B) you can see the segmenting and it's clearly soft plastic between!
Re:Glow Sticks (Score:4, Informative)
You need tight field lines to get coronal discharge - and if you use them, you'll probably see lightning coming from it in the dark. Tight field lines generally require fine wires. Also, the glow will be unicolor unless you outgas different gasses from your saber.
Not that I'd recommend using fluorescent light tubes filled with anything - that's a shatter risk. And while tritium isn't dangerous in most situations, that much tritium in a fragile container is asking for trouble - getting that much on your skin (where some may soak in) and in the air (which you'll breathe), you'll probably get a couple years to a couple decades of background radiation equivalent (based on the fact that drinking an entire tritium rifle sight is a two years dose).
If you are outdoors, you would probably be just fine. Tritium, after all, is hydrogen. It will rapidly ascend through the atmosphere. If it is inhaled, it is not metabolized by the body or taken into the bloodstream in significant quantities, so no huge problem there. The main with radioactivity is when you inhale a solid dust, and the material sits in your lungs, irradiating them for years on end. Tritium does not do this.
Also, the radiation can't penetrate the epidermis, which is a plus.
Re:Glow Sticks (Score:4, Informative)
Glow Sticks are non toxic for HUMANS (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Glow Sticks (Score:3, Informative)
By that logic, all the oxygen would have settled down here and the nitrogen would be up at 20,000 ft.
It ain't like that.
Re:Glow Sticks (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Slightly more information (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Glow Sticks (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, but how much do you use in your lab? Most biochemistry protocols I know of use amounts measured in microcuries or even less. The University of New Hampshire requires routine urinalysis [unh.edu] for tritium exposure for workers who handle more than 100 microcuries.
An emergency exit sign with six-inch lettering contains about 10 curies [specialty-lights.com]. In order to handle those quantities (or the substantially greater amount required to make a bright light saber) I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were fairly strict licensing and medical monitoring requirements.