The Human Centipede | Sequel banned by BBFC

Serbian Film sounds terrible. But A mate of mine has seen it and told me it didnt phase him too much. He knew all about it before watching it so perhaps thats why he was not too shocked.

I still worry about him sometimes
 
At the risk of coming across all Mary Whitehouse, I do sometimes worry about the way so many young people are so desensitised to extreme violence (including sexual violence) thanks to the relaxation of movie censorship laws. I can't help thinking the only healthy response to a film like this is to feel so repulsed you refuse to watch it.

If people not only watch it but claim to not be bothered at all by the content, then I'd say there're well on their way to being a sociopath.
 
I'm definitely too desensitized, A Serbian Film didn't really phase me at all, if anything I laughed at the erect penis through the eye bit, that was just silly.
 
At the risk of sounding like the complete opposite of that (and a bit like a deranged perverted bastard) I wouldn't in principle be against some of the things that are in that film on their own merit alone. In responsible context, pretty much anything can be made relevant.

For example if you were to make a film about someone who was raped as a baby and the effect it's had on them, then baby rape can at least be made into a significant thing with a purpose (though I wish I could stop saying baby rape, there I've said it again, I can't help but worry this will prove a problem the next time I visit PC World)...Something like Old Boy for example is pretty much an entire film based on one of the themes from this, and it's fantastic, but it's done with a point, and a purpose and at least relatively tastefully. But from what the synopsis of this film seems to show - thought admittedly I haven't seen it, so this is only admittedly reactionary Daily Mail style comment - is that some of these scenes (especailly the ...erm..BR scene) are just there for no narrative character purpose, with no call back or relevance to the characters involved in it, but just to be disgusting and shocking for the sake of showing how disgusting and shocking it is,

... and you can't help but feel that anything (literally ANYTHING) could've been used instead if it's really an allegory, and that anyone who would decide to put it in, write it and film it just for those reasons is clearly a horrible, horrible person who shouldn't be allowed near scissors...or other people.
 
I just read the synopsis of A Serbian Film. Sweet Christmas it sounds horrible. It sounds like the kind of thing you usually have to plunge to the deepest depths of the internet to find.
 
A lot of the most shocking parts of the film is about what you 'don't see' though. For instance, you never actually see

the baby being raped, you just hear it crying.

For me it's still just a film, it didn't affect me at all. What affected me was 1 Guy 1 Jar, now that's sick shit. There's a guy who actually had a pint glass break inside his arse.
 
cina said:
For instance, you never actually see

the baby being raped, you just hear it crying.
Click to expand...

If anything, that sounds even worse. (although obviously quite clearly, it isn't, because anything actually filmed would surely be a hangable offence)...but talk about soul destroying.
 
Mockney said:
At the risk of sounding like the complete opposite of that (and a bit like a deranged perverted bastard) I wouldn't in principle be against some of the things that are in that film on their own merit alone. In responsible context, pretty much anything can be made relevant.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I used to think but hearing about people who so much torture porn they're completely desensitise to stuff like this does make me worry. I mean, the whole ingrained revulsion we have to extreme violence has to serve some kind of purpose in keeping human society relatively non-violent. Some kind of safety net maybe? Allowing that to gradually get eroded away just seems... I dunno... risky. It's like that scene in Chocolate Orange, on a much grander scale.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
That's exactly what I used to think but hearing about people who so much torture porn they're completely desensitise to stuff like this does make me worry. I mean, the whole ingrained revulsion we have to extreme violence has to serve some kind of purpose in keeping human society relatively non-violent. Some kind of safety net maybe? Allowing that to gradually get eroded away just seems... I dunno... risky. It's like that scene in Chocolate Orange, on a much grander scale.
Click to expand...


:confused:
 
:lol:

Yeah, you know, that one with Dawn French..only on a much grander scale.

I do understand what you're saying Pogue, and personally I think torture porn is juvenille and worthless, but there has to be some leeway, other wise you'd never have films like Old Boy... or indeed Chocolate Orange. (undoubtedly Terry's masterpiece)

In fact Hollywood was going to do a remake of Old Boy, with Will Smith and Speilberg, except with all the main, erm, family-related themes taken out. So without some concession to shock or violence, you'd just get an endless stream of inoffensive Will Smith vehicles. And in the end, that would probably be more horrific.
 
I was surprised myself at how little shock or horror the film made me feel.

I mean the only reason I watched it is cause a friend heard about it and said "hey, let's watch this", so we did. We're all 22-24 and most of us didn't really squirm at all.

On the other hand, a friend heard about The Room being the shittest film ever, so we downloaded and drunkenly watched that too, which turned out to be a great idea.
 
Mockney said:
The synopsis? Or just my quick allusion to it? Cos tbf, even that's bad enough to read. Considering the plot is about a man who thinks he's in an art film, but which is actually disgusting exploitation, I think the actual, and more appropriate allegory is blindingly obvious.
Click to expand...

I went to wiki and read the whole thing. Why Mockney, why did you do this to me.
 
I thought it might work as some kind of aversion therapy. You know, like that scene from A Chocolate Orange, on a much smaller scale.
 
To be fair, I've read the wiki and it makes everything out to be way worse than it's actually portrayed in the film.
 
Mockney said:
I thought it might work as some kind of aversion therapy. You know, like that scene from A Chocolate Orange, on a much smaller scale.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Okay, by way of Wiki plots, I challenge anyone to find a film that sounds as bad as A Serbian Film. I don't think it exists.
 
3120042369_bbdfc0863d.jpg
 
Hectic said:
:lol:

Okay, by way of Wiki plots, I challenge anyone to find a film that sounds as bad as A Serbian Film. I don't think it exists.
Click to expand...

August Undergrounds Mordum.

I've read the description for it before and all the shit that happens and it sounds much worse than A Serbian Film.

The synopsis is not on wiki and I'm not going to try find it whilst I'm at work!
 
August Underdrounds Mordum is much worse than A Serbian Film.

The wiki plots for it, and the actual film itself.
 
cina said:
On the other hand, a friend heard about The Room being the shittest film ever, so we downloaded and drunkenly watched that too, which turned out to be a great idea.
Click to expand...

I couldn't remember for the life of me what that film was, after a few quick film stills I've seen this film slated all over the place, but never had the privilege of seeing it myself. But anyway, during my research on wiki, the plot for The Room is this:

The Roombegins with a homicidal maniac eating a bowl of cheese jizz, and then killing himself. The end.
Click to expand...

:lol::lol:
 
gaz1185 said:
I couldn't remember for the life of me what that film was, after a few quick film stills I've seen this film slated all over the place, but never had the privilege of seeing it myself. But anyway, during my research on wiki, the plot for The Room is this:



:lol::lol:
Click to expand...

The Room is brilliant to watch with friends, it's definitely a 'so bad it's good' type thing. Get drunk/high and you'll be laughing the whole way through.
 
Sw33t said:
August Underdrounds Mordum is much worse than A Serbian Film.

The wiki plots for it, and the actual film itself.
Click to expand...

It's utter, utter shit. Fred Vogel needs his head testing. It's not horror. He is a fecking clown.
 
I'm reading the synopsis for it...whatever it is, what possible reason does anyone have to watch that shit? That's fecking disgusting. It's just simulated snuff right?
 
Well, The Guinea Pig series sounds pretty bad. On Wiki it says Charlie Sheen saw one of the videos and was convinced the murder was real, he contacted the MPAA, who then contacted the FBI. I'm pretty sure I saw a documentary on this, because it sound the same, anyway the snuff-remakes were so realistic, the directors were regularly called in by Japanese authorities to constantly prove the special effects as just that.
 
Hectic said:
Well, The Guinea Pig series sounds pretty bad. On Wiki it says Charlie Sheen saw one of the videos and was convinced the murder was real, he contacted the MPAA, who then contacted the FBI. I'm pretty sure I saw a documentary on this, because it sound the same, anyway the snuff-remakes were so realistic, the directors were regularly called in by Japanese authorities to constantly prove the special effects as just that.
Click to expand...

The behind the scenes are great, just them dicking around laughing. I was pretty shocked when I first saw them. Tumbling doll of flesh is a pretty rough film.
 
Alex99 said:
Grotesque (2009 film) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

After being banned by the BBFC the director said he was "delighted and flattered by this most expected reaction from the faraway country, since the film is an honest conscientious work, made sure to upset the so-called moralists."

See, this is what I don't get. What point are you trying to make here? How are "so called moralists" people who object to seeing extreme and sadistic torture?...Basically, he made it just to get people really annoyed by it, which he knew would happen, which then allowed him to be pious about it. That's a terrible reason to make any film. This is precisely the kind of attitude I don't like and suspect of a lot of supposedly arty torture porn. Why? OK you're a bit of a prick? Well Ok then fine, but don't claim you're somehow inherently superior to people because you were willing to make it. Just say you quite like that sort of thing. Justifiying it as a superior trait is just...I dunno, ever so slightly the mentality of a physco.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
At the risk of coming across all Mary Whitehouse, I do sometimes worry about the way so many young people are so desensitised to extreme violence (including sexual violence) thanks to the relaxation of movie censorship laws. I can't help thinking the only healthy response to a film like this is to feel so repulsed you refuse to watch it.

If people not only watch it but claim to not be bothered at all by the content, then I'd say there're well on their way to being a sociopath.
Click to expand...

There's a big gap between not freaking out whilst watching a fictional scene and becoming a sociopath.
 
Mockney said:
After being banned by the BBFC the director said he was "delighted and flattered by this most expected reaction from the faraway country, since the film is an honest conscientious work, made sure to upset the so-called moralists."

See, this is what I don't get. What point are you trying to make here? How are "so called moralists" people who object to seeing extreme and sadistic torture?...Basically, he made it just to get people really annoyed by it, which he knew would happen, which then allowed him to be pious about it. That's a terrible reason to make any film. This is precisely the kind of attitude I don't like and suspect of a lot of supposedly arty torture porn. Why? OK you're a bit of a prick? Well Ok then fine, but don't claim you're somehow inherently superior to people because you were willing to make it. Just say you quite like that sort of thing. Justifiying it as a superior trait is just...I dunno, ever so slightly the mentality of a physco.
Click to expand...

Notoriety. Do you think films like Last House on Dead End St were made because the director thought it was good? They go down in history.
 
Longsden_7 said:
Notoriety. Do you think films like Last House on Dead End St were made because the director thought it was good? They go down in history.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree. I understand why they do it. That's sort of my point. If shock horror is your bag, or you want noteriety, cool. Lets call a spade a spade. This director seems very pleased about himself and tried to make some vague allusion to "so-called moralists" not liking it, thus elevating himself to some higher plateau of morality. Thus anything bad said about it is clearly irrelevant...well that's nonsense. There are horror films with higher purposes and grand themes, but this clearly isn't one of them, and usually the directors of those don't usually come out and question the morality of it's detractors. It's like he made a film so it would annoy people, just so he could grandstand about how he managed to annoy people. Isn't that just Wumming on a ridiculous level? He just seems like a dick.
 
He does sound like a really lame wum who has far too much time on his hands.

He probably made a film to push the boundaries as far as possible and get people complaining, so he could then triumph and say look, I made them complain. Yes. That surely proves my point. What's my point? That you are complainers.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
At the risk of coming across all Mary Whitehouse, I do sometimes worry about the way so many young people are so desensitised to extreme violence (including sexual violence) thanks to the relaxation of movie censorship laws. I can't help thinking the only healthy response to a film like this is to feel so repulsed you refuse to watch it.

If people not only watch it but claim to not be bothered at all by the content, then I'd say there're well on their way to being a sociopath.
Click to expand...

There's a difference. When I know something is completely fake it's very hard for it to have an affect on me.

I'm pretty confident I could watch A Serbian Film without it leaving a scar but I would be very bored throughout it all since almost all horror films are very boring stuff to watch.

However, I've seen a security camera of a car hitting a person (the person lived and from the camera you couldn't see blood) and that was way more shocking than any movie.
 
The synopsis for a film I just made is: Two killers make a bet then go around the woods killing people only to get bored when a victim escapes then go to a science lab to kill more people, the police get a phone call from the escapee then try to catch the killers, only for the killers to kill the policemen too, does this mean I'm an artist?
 
Hectic said:
He does sound like a really lame wum who has far too much time on his hands.

He probably made a film to push the boundaries as far as possible and get people complaining, so he could then triumph and say look, I made them complain. Yes. That surely proves my point. What's my point? That you are complainers.
Click to expand...

:lol:...Exactly. Damn, I could've used far less sentences to make that point.
 
:lol: How the feck did Charlie Sheen get involved in something like that and yet no-one even seems surprised.

Sheen-Gibson-Gazza Dream Team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.