THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2 MIGHT JUST BE AS FUCKED UP AS TOM SIX PROMISED

People actually want to see this shit? I'm not one for censorship but come on...

The difference is that the BBFC did (under the current administration) see Salo as fit for release over here, uncut, on the grounds it was a sufficiently good film, with enough of a point to make, that it wasn't obscene or even especially gratuitous.

So, no, this doesn't sound like Salo at all.

So? They didn't go out on any limb with Salo- that's been recognized as a film with merit for decades. Catching up to what everyone else knew a quarter century later doesn't lend their classification any special gravity when they ban a brand new film.

God knows the chances of HC2 being particularly brilliant are slim, but I couldn't care less what the BBFC thinks about it when I'm making that determination for myself.

Eh, there's a fine line to walk between having a horrifying central idea and just going as far as you can.  I read long ago that movies tend to go in cycles until someone comes up with the idea of just throwing a baby in front of a train.  The first movie walked that line with a good premise (that I would agree was ruined by the internet) and little else, but it sounds like this may be going overboard just for the sake of going overboard.

And so, I will see The Human Centipede II.

I'm not sure this guy crafted a modern day Salo and I think the comparison -- beyond the gore -- is a bit off.  What is Six trying to say with HC2?  Why is that guy masturbating with sandpaper? And is that message original?  I'm not sure that any message Six believes he is imparting hasn't been done to death before.  Really, this just sounds like an excuse to be extreme and little else.  Whereas Salo was actually examining a philosophy and its moral failings, HC2 just looks like an excuse to be disgusting.  Passolini crafted a powerful argument against human degradation; Six wants to show you his chewed up food.

If this guy wants to put intellectual window dressing on this film fine, but let's not indulge him with comparisons to great art.  HC2 is the film equivalent of a bungee jump, nothing more.  

Nobody comes out of this looking good. Six has nakedly and artlessly courted controversy, the film sounds like the polar opposite of what made the original work, and the BBFC come across as the stuffy idiots they are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather 

Nobody comes out of this looking good. Six has nakedly and artlessly courted controversy, the film sounds like the polar opposite of what made the original work, and the BBFC come across as the stuffy idiots they are.

I agree that keeping the film out of the UK is a bad idea -- as is censorship in any form -- but I agree with their explanation that this film lacks any kind of artistic statement of value, and I like the fact that they are making that distinction. 

You've seen the film, Devildoubt?

No, but the BBFC have. Slippery slope and all that, but I find it hard to get up in arms about it at all, and I'm one of the Limeys who's not gonna be able to see this legally.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renn Brown 

You've seen the film, Devildoubt?

Have you?

I'm pretty much against all censorship (I only say "pretty much" because I don't believe in absolutes either way, and I'm sure one day someone will pop up that I do think should be censored) so I don't agree with the ban. Especially since it will be futile and the film will likely only get more exposure now than it would have before.

Having said that, Tom Six is a fucking joke. The first film was empty as can be and I'm sure this one is only going to be worse. Much like the criticisms I hold towards Zack Snyder, simply putting in the meta-aspect of a character being spurred on by the actual first movie isn't enough to make this some artistic statement on how images affect us, etc. At it's core, this particular tasteless asshole is just enjoying making the most disturbing and disgusting shit he can come up with, and (most of) those wanting to see it really aren't interested in the pursuit of some artistic message, they just want to see something akin to a snuff film.

And I guess that's fine, just own your fucking perversion. Don't trot it around under the guise of "oh, but it's a brilliant commentary on _____."

It all sounds like extreme satire perceived poorly. The first film showed vacant party girls under a very judgmental microscope. This is just part of the first act before the characters are strapped to hospital beds. Mainly what I'm talking about refers to the presentation of ignorant Americans failing to navigate unknown territory and displaying an inability to communicate with a foreign inhabitants. These girls are characterized as dumb dance-club-bound fish-out-of-water stereotypes.

I wouldn't be surprised if Tom Six is going after the audience members who get off on films like SAW IV. Sexual exploitation and hyper-violence is easy to label as bad for certain people, but who cares. The days of the Video Nasty have vanished among this new-world sea of media availability. Let him take a jab at the viewership. Hopefully it will be worth watching.

After watching the first film I think that Six falls just a bit on the wrong side of Trying Too Hard. I had the same reaction to A Serbian Film, too. Horrible things happening to people who only exist to have horrible things happen to them kind of leave me cold. Neither outraged nor fascinated.

Plus the barb wire thing has been done before. By Graham Masterton. Only instead of a penis it was a cat that was wrapped with it. And it was self inflicted.

Or I could be some sort of de-sensitized monster.

Your Gods regularly raped women whilst disguised as farm animals, stel. Of COURSE you're a desensitised monster!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devildoubt 

Have you?

Nope! Nor do my points require me to have seen it.

That's some shit you say when you've seen the movie, or at least have access to enough public, published reactions to have a guess not pulled entirely from your ass, or the ass of a board of bureaucrats.

I think you're both kinda making qualitative judgements based on very little. Devildoubt's dismissed any possibility of the film saying anything meaningful, while you seem already halfway-convinced that this will be a Haneke-like indictment of torture-porn culture. I don't think either take is based on much, to be honest, although the idea of Six turning out anything genuinely intellectually challenging seems farfetched given the sheer unpleasantness the synopsis is touting. Let's be honest here: were this the latest SAW opus running afoul of the oddbods at the BBFC, would be nearly as inclined to cut the filmmakers some slack? Has one interesting but slight horror film really bought Six that much goodwill?

He has the right to prove me/others wrong, but the first film (which I have seen) was a fucking joke. It was cheap shock value and little else. And if he actually did intend it to be something else (if you believe his laughable attempts to liken it to some metaphor for WWII), then it's an even bigger failure in my opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather 

I think you're both kinda making qualitative judgements based on very little. Devildoubt's dismissed any possibility of the film saying anything meaningful, while you seem already halfway-convinced that this will be a Haneke-like indictment of torture-porn culture. I don't think either take is based on much, to be honest, although the idea of Six turning out anything genuinely intellectually challenging seems farfetched given the sheer unpleasantness the synopsis is touting. Let's be honest here: were this the latest SAW opus running afoul of the oddbods at the BBFC, would be nearly as inclined to cut the filmmakers some slack? Has one interesting but slight horror film really bought Six that much goodwill?

Yeah, no.

Big difference between "see it for yourself, or let a significant number of others do so before making definitive judgement calls" and making a definitive dismissal of a film's potential to have any artistic merit whatsoever.

I didn't make a qualitative judgement of any kind. That's the point.

I really didn't get any "championing" of the film coming from Renn in the article. Some well deserved scorn towards the BBFC, yes.

You dedicated a pretty lengthy portion of the article to theorising about how Six could've created the new SALO. That seems llike a pretty big leap. It's not making an overt qualitative judgement, granted, but it's also not just saying "see it for yourself". It's already building a narrative of the film being a cult gem held back by eeevil censors. Like I said, if this were Uwe Boll's latest piece of shit I doubt the tone would be the same.

That said, I agree with you pretty much. I'm just glad the BBFC are a lot more lenient than they once were.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renn Brown 

Quote:

 

Yeah, no.

 

Big difference between "see it for yourself, or let a significant number of others do so before making definitive judgement calls" and making a definitive dismissal of a film's potential to have any artistic merit whatsoever.

 

I didn't make a qualitative judgement of any kind. That's the point.

Sure there's potential. I just think the odds are severely stacked against it. And I base that off of the horrible first film and the director's comments about the film. So taking all of that and adding that description to it, I don't think someone's out of line for assuming the worst because to think otherwise, you're basically praying for a real longshot.

Making ANY film with a really profound and significant artistic statement is hard. Making something that involves sand-paper jack-offs, barbed-wire rape and fecal-titillation into something of any worthwhile artistic consideration takes more talent and ingenuity than most filmmakers could ever hope to have. And this guy... he doesn't have it.

I'd be dubious if Stanley Kubrick wanted to attempt such a thing. I definitely don't trust this moron. What I do trust him to do is exactly what he did last time, take some serviceable technical skill and combine that with a high on shock-value premise that will instantly help get his film recognized and talked about in order to boost his name.
 

The comparison to Salo was couched in skepticism that he would be aiming as thematically high, thus narrowing the comparison to the shocking content and release context.

Also mentioned: that the BBFC doesn't do this shit willy-nilly. Read my repeatedly published thoughts on the MPAA and tell me I went out of my way to make a case for the BBFC being "eeevil." Trust me, when I'm condemning them you'll know it. I'll be immature and call an opaque censorship board nasty names when I feel it necessary, I don't give a fuck.

I get that some people have a grudge against Six or whatever. That's cool. I'm not advocating the motherfucker be put in the Horror Hall Of Fame because he made a barbwire rape movie folks. Just saying... ya know, maybe some of us should see it.

I have no grudge! I liked FIRST SEQUENCE, almost loved it. I just fear that Six has bought into the hype of him being the master of unpleasant cinema.

I'm less bothered by the overt, intentional "pushing the envelope" than by the absence of Dieter Laser.

This is an intense thread. Am I the only one that thinks this is no big deal?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renn Brown 

The comparison to Salo was couched in skepticism that he would be aiming as thematically high, thus narrowing the comparison to the shocking content and release context.

 

Um, no.  And anyway, like Andrew wrote (rather eloquently, I might add), the fact that you chose Salo to use as a comparision implies you believe there is some amount of artistic endeavor that the BBFC didn't see, or wouldn't see. If you didn't, why use Salo as a basis for comparision?  There are a lot of horror films that are disgusting that lack artistic merit (the 2nd and 3rd August Underground movies, for instance).  Why not choose one of them?   Frankly, I think the idea of Six crafting any kind of original metaphor thats' worth viewing is bullshit, but what can you do?

And really, I don't care if you're a true believer in the artistic quality of this film at all.  Bust out the sandpaper and have at it if you dig it that much.  But don't try and shut me down with an argument that could equally negate yours. 

How timely:

http://www.avclub.com/articles/what-is-morally-offlimits-in-pop-culture,57054/

I particularly thought this part was relevant:

Fucking really?

Some of you who are like, "FUCK TOM SIX" are the same sorts of people who go into the Transformers 3 thread saying, "Well, those first two sucked, but that's a nice trailer, I guess I'll pay to see that next one!"

It's a HUMAN CENTIPEDE SEQUEL. How humorless do you have to be to not appreciate this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 
It's a HUMAN CENTIPEDE SEQUEL. How humorless do you have to be to not appreciate this?

Just humorless enough to not find humor in rape involving barbed wire.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

Some of you who are like, "FUCK TOM SIX" are the same sorts of people who go into the Transformers 3 thread saying, "Well, those first two sucked, but that's a nice trailer, I guess I'll pay to see that next one!"

That's a bizarre analogy. Also, sure barbed-wire rape could be turned into humor, I guess. But this conceited jackoff isn't the one to do it, judging by his first at bat.

I think part of the point here is that Salo is kind of a weird choice for comparison, since the BBFC have a history of turning a blind eye to it and it was always shown in the UK at private film screenings. Something like Zombie Flesh Eaters or Cannibal Holocaust might fit better.

LIttle disappointed by the direction he's going with this. I never saw the first one, but was curious as to what kind of medical experiments he was going to come up with and how he was going to push the envelope in that direction. Of course there was going to be an homage to the original centipede and I was curious about that...perhaps a human snake, a longer human centipede, or a human centipede infinitum, i.e. a circle!

The barbed wire thing had already been done similarly in a mainstream film with just enough nuance to be approachable and enough grime to be shocking and disgusting. The film was Seven, the device that punished the chick for committing LUST. If you want to actually see something like that occur on screen, then brother I just don't know what to tell you.

It will have a hard time beating A Serbian Film in being shockingly disgusting, and even then it'll not be successful at being a movie. It'll be an unwatchable piece of shit like I Spit On Your Grave. There's no tension or thrill in watching pure suffering, especially if you don't give a fuck about those who suffer.

I'll honestly prefer to see another lame Hatchet sequel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Navidson 

LIttle disappointed by the direction he's going with this. I never saw the first one, but was curious as to what kind of medical experiments he was going to come up with and how he was going to push the envelope in that direction. Of course there was going to be an homage to the original centipede and I was curious about that...perhaps a human snake, a longer human centipede, or a human centipede infinitum, i.e. a circle!

 

The barbed wire thing had already been done similarly in a mainstream film with just enough nuance to be approachable and enough grime to be shocking and disgusting. The film was Seven, the device that punished the chick for committing LUST. If you want to actually see something like that occur on screen, then brother I just don't know what to tell you.

He actually originally said it was going to be a twelve person centipede. Little bummed out he went for "meta" instead of "bigger and better." I guess the other options are "more comedy" or "in space" or something.

Agreed with the above poster- it will be hard to top A Serbian Film, which just had an ATMOSPHERE that made me want to vomit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

I'm less bothered by the overt, intentional "pushing the envelope" than by the absence of Dieter Laser.

 

This is an intense thread. Am I the only one that thinks this is no big deal?

I don't really see what the big deal is either. Six is a horror director, and sometimes those guys have only one objective: to horrify. So as long as the actors are consenting and the blood is made of syrup who cares what the point of the movie is, noone's forcing you to watch it.

And I would be AMAZED if it outdoes Serbian Film.

I think it's an interesting idea for the sequel.  Intriguing.  It may be made by a mediocre filmmaker but that doesn't mean it won't have some merit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

 

I don't really see what the big deal is either. Six is a horror director, and sometimes those guys have only one objective: to horrify. So as long as the actors are consenting and the blood is made of syrup who cares what the point of the movie is, noone's forcing you to watch it.

 

And I would be AMAZED if it outdoes Serbian Film.

True, but sometimes filmmakers need to horrify to make a legitimate point.  Those guys are also known as artists.  I'm agnostic on whether Six is an artist, but hey...I'm hard to please.