A Serbian Film...

[Scoopicman]

My point about the baby not being real was just that, without having seen the film, people may think a real newborn child was subjected to the experiance

Wait, it's not real???????? Do you mean that other movies, like SEED, have real babies and acts of violence in them? I thought these were all snuff movies..... (Yes, I'm being totally sarcastic. As Crackerfunk said, not even our moms are going to think this is real.

Anyway, thanks for the welcome!

Welcome, mad_hatter! I'm classic horror fan, so I'm looking forward to a different conversation in the future.

Being from Britain, we had the video nasty business here in the 80's. We look back at it now, thinking how rediculous it was for campaigners like Mary Whitehouse to criticise a movie that she'd never even seen. Why is this case different?

Because we are not politicians, nor are we suggesting any type of censorship. I specifically am against any politician (Joe Lieberman, Hillary Clinton, etc.) who threatens my choices of movies and videogames. As a private citizen I also have the right to say that say what I think about any movie, based on what I read, which is different than me telling you not to see it. It is a discussion topic, yes?

As for the "Video Nasties," I have a book on the subject! I'm sorry that your country wussed out and bowed to media and political pressure. I'm sorry to say that a lot of those movies (EVIL DEAD, LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT, THE BEYOND, etc.) pale to some of the stuff coming out, now.

I think I'm going to start a thread on books, so check it out....

 

[mad_hatter]

Okay, one last post from me on this.

I never once even suggested that a real baby may have been abused. I know they wouldn't. I also don't believe a man raped an animatronic baby. The actor pretended! Just like Jodie Foster pretended to be raped in The Accused. Pretending to rape somebody for the purpose of a movie production isn't a criminal offence and newborn babies have been used in film and tv for a long, long time, so, if a parent were deranged enough to allow it, it wouldn't be a criminal offence for a man to pretend to rape a baby for use in a film. Please don't take that to mean I would find that in anyway acceptable, I wouldn't. But, it is feasable.

So, my last point will be this: without having seen the film, you cannot know how this film has been shot. Yes, the content of the movie does take things too far, but the movie itself is not as graphic as you might expect.

 

[Scoopicman]

Okay, one last post from me on this.

I never once even suggested that a real baby may have been abused.

Dude, I even put "SARCASM" in parenthesis! None of us think it's real. The point is that it could be Raggedy Ann doll and I still don't like the subject matter. I knew this baby was an animatronic doll before you ever heard of this movie.

without having seen the film, you cannot know how this film has been shot. Yes, the content of the movie does take things too far, but the movie itself is not as graphic as you might expect.

I have no problem with "graphic." Subject matter is key. Subject matter is key. Subject matter is key.


I love graphic! I've seen DEAD ALIVE and BAD TASTE 30 times each. Guts everywhere, but..... it's funny.


I'll give you an example. Stuart Gordon was talking about all the gore he used for REANIMATOR. He pulled out some stops. But,.......he was shocked when people were walking out of RESERVOIR DOGS, when the cop got his ear cut off and Michael Madsen doused him with gasoline.

Do you understand the difference? The ear cutting was not even shown, but the suggestion of what was going on was too intense for some audiences. There are movies like HARD CANDY that will make you wince, even though you don't see anything. It's the content.

 

[NickClapper]

All the controversy around the film meant that I felt obliged to see it.

All in all I agree with mad hatter. The ideas are more awful than the execution. If we look at the themes behind all of the crimes that are committed in the film (incest, child abuse, murder...etc.) then that is terrible and the way they are represented is bad. However it isn't as shocking as somethings that are released. I think the BBFC cut from it because it was seen as glamorising paedophilia, rather than because the scenes alone were so disgusting. Most of the violence (physical and sexual) happens off camera and whilst the implication is almost as bad, it's not as graphic.

Personally I found the self mutilation is Antichrist more difficult to watch and the premise (although it is really toned down) of Hostel 2 more disturbing. A Serbian Film is an abomination, but at least it leaves a fair bit to the imagination (and that's, unfortunately, unavoidable).

As for the excuse that it is a metaphor, I actually got the impression that that was the overriding idea behind the film. Somewhere along the line it got lost in being plain nasty, but you can tell in some of the dialogue and imagery that there was at least a partial intention to shock people about the plight of Serbia, as well as the plight of the people in the film. Perhaps the Newborn Porn scene is the most obvious example of the metaphor (I have to say that having heard rumours about this scene, I was reluctant to watch it, but it was actually much less graphic than other pieces) but there is something to read into almost every scene.

Disgusting, yes. But interesting also.

 

[polfilmblog]

Well I'm still trying to get over Salo. So, I'll pass for now.

"The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park were fake, but they still scared the shit out of me. "

Dude. How old are you?

 

[bird]

Disgusting, yes. But interesting also.

Thanks for the review, Nick.

I still stand by my assertion that there's just too much content out in the world, that I will not have missed anything by not viewing this. I guess the only other pertinent question would be, was this film worth the money you spent to view it?



@ polfilmblog I believe Dready was making a statement in regards to the context of the whole, that's what we viewers do.... suspend belief.

 

[NickClapper]

Thanks for the review, Nick.

I still stand by my assertion that there's just too much content out in the world, that I will not have missed anything by not viewing this. I guess the only other pertinent question would be, was this film worth the money you spent to view it?.

The answer for me is no. I regret seeing and would not encourage other people to see it. I don't like any of what I would classify 'torture porn' and find it strange that anyone can enjoy sexualised horror or gratuitously violent torture.

This is an interesting review by Britain's preeminent horror film critic, Kim Newman: http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=137038

I would say that there are much better ways of understanding the Serbian crisis than watching this film, but all in all it could have ended up being a much worse film than it was- both in terms of content, ideas and execution.

That said I would certainly not be recommending this to anyone.

 

[Scoopicman]

Personally I found the self mutilation is Antichrist more difficult to watch

But ANTICHRIST has a talking fox!

Well I'm still trying to get over Salo.

Pass the poop, please.

"The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park were fake, but they still scared the shit out of me. "

Dude. How old are you?

That "Dude" is a dudette. I always thought the T-Rex chasing the jeep was pretty intense, especially in the theater.



With 4 minutes cut out of the SERBIAN FILM UK cut, I think the people there are getting the soft version. Admittedly, I find the uncut version of MAN BITES DOG a bit disturbing, while the R version comes off as more humorous. "Cinema! Cinema...."

 

[gooberman]

Wow... I didnt know this thread would be such a hot topic. I was simply trying to get some things off my mind.

With everything being taken into account, The cinematography in this movie was amazing and the acting was even better. If it wasn't for the rape, incest, pedophilia, and necrophilia, This wouldn't be a bad movie to watch.

 

[Scoopicman]

Wow... I didnt know this thread would be such a hot topic. I was simply trying to get some things off my mind.

I've been meaning to ask you which version you watched, since the UK release cut out 4 minutes?

 

[gooberman]

I watched the unrated version.

 

[Scoopicman]

That's what I figured, looking at how you reacted in your original post. To me, 4 minutes seems to be a lot.

 

[AvsB]

i watched this film last week bc my buddy told me it would make me sick......ive seen somethings in my life......ive even seen someone i know shot right in front of me......but this film.......i wish i could unwatch it........ but i do agree with Mad hatter........ i dont think im gonna watch this again..... and in a funny note my friend who watched it said this movie has made him stop watching porn........