Human Centipede 2 Rejected by BBFC

[krooton]

The only think shocking about these kinda movies is that anyone (a) has any fascination in them (b) finds them shocking... its not like its hard to come up with something "depraved" and "shocking" and then come up with something even more so - anyone with a reason for watching these kinda movies does need their head examined because they are either incredibly childish or are actually depraved.

Isn't the primary reason to watch a film (of any genre) to invoke an emotional response?

Comedies to laugh, romantic dramas to cry, horrors to be scared, etc.

What is some people want to see how shocked they could be, possibly getting such an emotional response is a bit of a rush, like adrenaline from bungee jumping.

People are curious by nature, might just be that.

 

[utajoker]

lol at all this.

if you dont like the film dont watch it ???

what does it matter to you if someone else does want to.


i dont care that my fiancee went to watch take that on saturday, something equally offensive just to the ear. she enjoyed it im glad she did.

no one is forcing you to watch the film.

 

[Weebull]

just because you watch something does not mean you think its good, normal, nice or acceptable

At what point did vonhelmet even try to suggest the opposite?

 

[eggcup]

LOL I could'nt watch this. Im a wimp, I felt ill just watching the trailer for the first Human Centipede film

 

[Vonhelmet]

I like war films but i dont like killing poeple or real wars...

I love american phsyco however i'd not condone dropping a chain saw on someone...

i like aeon flux where she kills soooo many poeple near the end... but I dont condone mass murder...

just because you watch something does not mean you think its good, normal, nice or acceptable

I didn't say that. I said that to watch that sort of porn is to watch a freakshow, or to essentially be a freak if you yourself are aroused by it.

 

[Vonhelmet]

Killing hookers and shooting cops is abnormal, but you wouldn't think twice about anyone playing GTA.

I would, a bit, as I question slightly the immoral imperative that people desire in playing that sort of game. I like to be able to identify with the protagonist in games I play, and I find it hard to identify with a criminal.

I wouldn't watch this film (or Serbia, Irreversible and the ilk), but that's not to say I'd judge people who do, I just don't think the films have enough artistic merit for me to watch them. However, films like Tetsuo (mild in comparison, but can still be disturbing) are art shoots, and I enjoy watching them.

I agree that they lack art, and as such their grotesqueries are hard to justify. I'm not convinced that Irreversible lacks art, as it reviewed well among "mainstream" critics, but I've not seen it so I can't be sure.

In all honesty, I felt hollow simply after watching the Saw films - but I can watch something like Cannibal Holocaust without issue. I guess it's the humanisation and lack of empathy in the aforementioned films that *really* make them disturbing, not the content.

I agree.

 

[Rroff]

I like war films but i dont like killing poeple or real wars...

I love american phsyco however i'd not condone dropping a chain saw on someone...

i like aeon flux where she kills soooo many poeple near the end... but I dont condone mass murder...

just because you watch something does not mean you think its good, normal, nice or acceptable

No one (atleast no normally adjusted person) watches aeon flux for the body count tho.

These kinda movies are just shocking for shocking sake and I'm yet to see any reason why a normally adjusted person would watch them.

 

[Vonhelmet]

These kinda movies are just shocking for shocking sake and I'm yet to see any reason why a normally adjusted person would watch them.

They watch them because they're disgusting, and that's about it. I imagine there's an element of oneupmanship in it - in the same way that the producers of films like this are on a quest to provide the most disgusting things imaginable, there is apparently a group of people on a quest to watch the most disgusting things imaginable. I'm not sure where the sense of achievement comes in that, though.

 

[Nexus]

That's pretty much what the deal is with these films.

A Serbian film... the name alone says so much about it and the Director's have no bones about explaining that's what they set out to do. Basically to show that they are Serbian and can create an over the top violent and sickening film in the same way Hollywood can just for the sake of it. They know that there are those that will pay to see it so that's why there is a market for it.

Other Directors though, like Lars Von Trier are actually just messed up and think they are creating something truly amazing. Antichrist is not the most violent or horrific film I've ever seen, but what was going on in the Director's head to make it is. It's such a bizarre film.

 

[IIDeathCubeKII]

Other Directors though, like Lars Von Trier are actually just messed up and think they are creating something truly amazing. Antichrist is not the most violent or horrific film I've ever seen, but what was going on in the Director's head to make it is. It's such a bizarre film.

Von Triers is an odd individual for sure but Antichrist was great, it had meaning and was shot beautifully. I think he set out to make the most misogynistic film he could, just to anger many of his critics that constantly accuse him of hating women. He has a very warped sense of humour that I think plays out in the film.


Here is "The Doctor" Mark Kermode talking about Martyrs (He really is the greatest film critic):

Also Mark Kermode on "A Serbian Film"

 

[Vonhelmet]

The key points of Kermode's comments being...

He says that any allegory within A Serbian Film is lost in the gore, and he says it's a film without merit... And he compares it to The Aristocrats. And he calls it pompous and pretentious torture porn. He says that it is over the top and stupid and grotesque, and it is just exploitation.

So basically, I'm pretty much absolutely in line with one of the few movie critics to defend A Serbian Film, except he comes down on the side of saying that there is a case for it as a piece of absurd trivia at the revolting end of the movie-making scale, whereas I stop short of that point and simply ask why?

Also, if we look at some of the imdb ratings for the films that Kermode discusses, and which have been mentioned here, there's a bit of a trend...

Blue Velvet, imdb 7.8/10
Irreversible, imdb 7.3/10
Martyrs, imdb 7.0/10
A Serbian Film, imdb 5.8/10
The Human Centipede, imdb 4.9/10
Grotesque, imdb 4.7/10

 

[Pestilence]

I don't often agree too strongly with Kermode these days as I think his growing status is getting the better of his attitude, but he makes some very valid and convincing points on Martyrs and A Serbian Film.


Martyrs, I wasn't particularly shocked at per se, or even tempted to look away let alone walk out. That's not to say it isn't an immeasurably powerful piece of work and didn't have a major effect on me. It most certainly did on a thematic level.

A Serbian Film is a movie that almost took me into a ring and gave me a kicking. It's exploitation, grand exploitation -- no bones about it -- on an absolutely visceral level. Allegory or not, as Kermode agrees it's a technically impressive piece of work but whether you're unwilling to just submit and take the type of figurative beating it offers is what shapes your view of the film.

By unwilling I mean accept what the film is about, the content it holds, and take it in without judgment. It's already obvious that too many people are absolutely unwilling - to the point of questioning the mental wellbeing of people who have actually sat and watched the film and didn't immediately want to burn it.

Did I enjoy A Serbian Film? Hell no, I didn't. Did I appreciate it and the effect it had on me? Yes, yes I did.

 

[IIDeathCubeKII]

Kermode was comparing it to the joke The Aristocrats not really the movie. As in A Serbian Film just gets sicker and sicker until it becomes absurd.

And IMDB for ratings of films, that's a joke right?

 

[Vonhelmet]

Kermode was comparing it to the joke The Aristocrats not really the movie. As in A Serbian Film just gets sicker and sicker until it becomes absurd.

I know, which is what I was comparing it to

And IMDB for ratings of films, that's a joke right?

No? Would you prefer I went to rottentomatoes.com? Because the picture will be even starker over there.

 

[IIDeathCubeKII]

I know, which is what I was comparing it to



No? Would you prefer I went to rottentomatoes.com? Because the picture will be even starker over there.

It just seems that after reading a lot of your posts you have never seen most of these films, your opinion seems swayed by what the popular judgement is without actually watching them and coming up with your own (now) informed opinion. And using popular websites for ratings is just ridiculous, these films are challenging and not for everybody,.unlike guff like Avatar or The Dark Night which both got to number one in the top 250 which is proof enough that the masses are attracted to crap that doesn't challenge them in any way, just look at the most popular tv shows or the music charts, creativeness and individualism doesn't exist.

Now I didn't like A Serbian Film or The Human,Caterpillar, I actually wasted 4 hours of my life watching this pointless crap, but doing so enabled me to make my own opinion and defend their existence.

Edit* I'm writing this on my phone so ignore mistakes, it's awkward

 

[Vonhelmet]

It just seems that after reading a lot of your posts you have never seen most of these films, your opinion seems swayed by what the popular judgement is without actually watching them and coming up with your own (now) informed opinion. And using popular websites for ratings is just ridiculous, these films are challenging and not for everybody,.unlike guff like Avatar or The Dark Night which both got to number one in the top 250 which is proof enough that the masses are attracted to crap that doesn't challenge them in any way, just look at the most popular tv shows or the music charts, creativeness and individualism doesn't exist.

Rottentomatoes is critics opinions, so you'll get about the best picture you can of whether films are any good, which is what I'm concerned with. And Kermode as good as said that A Serbian Film is not challenging on any level beyond whether you can stomach the gore, which is barely a measure of whether something is worth watching.

As for imdb... yeah, things leap in at number one, but they slide pretty quickly if they aren't up to snuff. It's not like the top 250 is full of mediocre populist crap.

This all ties back to something I said earlier, that some people appear to conflate with "difficult to watch because of the gore" with "mentally stimulating and challenging". Never mind that disgust is about the easiest emotion to invoke, while true fear is much harder to invoke.

 

[IIDeathCubeKII]

It doesn't matter if it's critics or regular people, your missing the point.,I don't need anybody to tell me what is good and what isn't. I watch a film, then I look up the reviews, to compare notes. I find a few reviewers with similar tastes in films and use them to see how my opinion compares to theirs. Your taking their opinions at face value without actually making your own mind up.

And films like Blue Velvet, if you actually watched it contains less gore than indiana jones, but it is a challenging film and so it divides opinion. By default films like this will get lower average scores than other great films like Shawshank Redemption because (not to it's detriment) it's made for a broader audience.

 

[xJcBx]

Can't we all just get along and accept that some people enjoy these genres, like being shocked and horrified.. It's not like he's actually doing it..

 

[uv]

Blue Velvet, imdb 7.8/10
Irreversible, imdb 7.3/10
Martyrs, imdb 7.0/10
A Serbian Film, imdb 5.8/10
The Human Centipede, imdb 4.9/10
Grotesque, imdb 4.7/10

How come you've included Blue Velvet?

It's disturbing, I guess, but it's Lynch. The film is genuinely great, definitely has artistic merit, and is critically acclaimed. There's no need to lump it in with the likes of ~Serbian~ imo

 

[Pestilence]

How come you've included Blue Velvet?

It's disturbing, I guess, but it's Lynch. The film is genuinely great, definitely has artistic merit, and is critically acclaimed. There's no need to lump it in with the likes of ~Serbian~ imo

I think he included it as Kermode mentioned it in regards to being a challenging piece of work.