Extreme Movies - where is the line?

Well you wont get any augments from me, I watched it once and that's it, I did find it boring but disturbing.

So would you say this film goes over the line.
To quote myself earlier Apart from the usual ethical taboo areas, I think there is NO line
 I would say this film goes over the line, children/murder is a taboo subject.

The feelings towarRAB this film (from this thread alone) should help it deciding where to draw the line.
 
I'd agree with you. I don't really watch many extreme films so I don't know how common child murder is, but in this case the only purpose it has is to shock as far as I can see. Actually for all the murders. It had no artistic merit because nothing was ever explained or the plot furthered because of it.

The only explanation they tried to give for the killers actions were some vague allusions to him being a nazi sympathiser or something through his nonsensical flashbacks. So I can only see it as the director just using the project as an excuse to shock people.
 
You have got me thinking now. I can't really think off the top of my head a film that shows child murder in the same way as MSP did, or not one I own or have seen. Of course we see it in a much more sensitised way in many films "Shindlers List" jumps to mind, bad choice of film really as this can argue artistic licence, that it was telling a true and graphical story. All the same its there but watered down for us, so we may choose not to dwell on it. MSP did not give us the choice to ignore.

Just to make it clear, I am not defending the film, I thought it was bloody crap. But it is an horrific film.
 
It's definitely a fine line. I watched An American Crime recently which is basically 90 minutes of a young girl being tortured and it's horrific to watch but I thought it was a powerful film. I could just be a hypocrite though because even though it's based on true events (and the actual events were far worse than portrayed in the film) there aren't really any explanations or views put forward by the director as to how this crime could happen. It's basically just a retelling.

But then how can you explain how a mother and neighborhood of children could torture a girl with no-one doing anything to stop it anyway? And if you can't offer a viewpoint, why are you putting it on screen in the first place?

So in that sense I can't really explain why I thought AAC was a good film without being a bit hypocritical. I dunno.
 
I also sat through An American Crime a few weeks ago and found it very hard to watch, just because it was so uncomfortable. When you are faced with the fact that it was based on real events it makes it even harder to stomach the violent scenes.

Theres a 2007 movie about a young girl tortured and abused by her aunt, called The Girl Next door http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0830558/ (not to be confused with the 2004 Elisha Cuthbert affair) but this movie is fictional but inspired by the American Crime case of Sylvia, and is apparently even more graphic movie than that movie, but I am thinking long and hard about whether I want to watch a movie that will leave me very depressed. Both AAC and The Girl next door show a chilRAB death and abuse, but I have heard rumblings that it The Girl next door contains torture porn which is crossing a line and pushing the line.

In the case of An American Crime, I think it was the fact that Sylvia had no one to help her that was so shocking, because all the kiRAB were abusing her in her basement, and no one had the courage or sense to stand up to Gertrude. They were brainwashed into thinking that Sylvia was "bad" and "deserved" what she was getting, and that is why the movie is so powerful.

I think Mysterious Skin is also a very disturbing and extreme movie because it has child peadophilia featured http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0370986/

I havent seen Cannibal Hollocaust, but that is a famous disturbing movie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078935/.
 
Yeah, I've read about The Girl Next Door and i'm not sure I could watch it. As much as An American Crime made me feel sick it was quite tastefully (bad word to use maybe) shot in that it didn't really show the violence. I think the horror of the events alone is enough to shock.

And I completely agree with you on Mysterious Skin. I went into that not knowing what it was really about beyond it starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt who I quite like, and it was like a punch in the gut. Pretty disturbing stuff.
 
I have Cannibal Hollocaust, its quite tame by today's standarRAB. but still quite shocking.
Animal torture scenes got it banned I think and the infamous female impaled on a tree branch. it was very clever how they did it.
Picture here, not for the screamish
She actually balanced on a very small stool nailed to the top of the stump and then held the other part of hte branch with her teeth, add blood and makeup and it looks like the real thing
 
There has to be a clear distinction between movies that are extrerme violence, and movies that leave you depressed? For example, I left Requiem for a Dream with a deep sense of depression, and I have no wish to watch the movie again because it was just depression, but I still think it was a powerful movie even if there wasn't too much violence?
 
You might want to check your R1 disc.

If its got a black cover with "Directors Cut" on it then its the uncut version- and its region 0.

The generally available version is the one with 12 minutes edited out that was submitted to the BBFC- IIRC it has a white cover.

The Directors Cut is quite hard to find and is not available from places like PLAYUSA
 
Cannibal Holocaust is another one you need to check.

Presumably its not the UK version


I have the 2 disc US version with the useful option to view with or without animal violence
 
Thanks for the heaRAB up Dennis.

The one I got on MSP is the rare one, no it came from diabolical dvd or something like that. its the black case/directors. Must admit, I always assumed it was reg2, mental note to self, 0.

Yeh, my CH is the grindhouse 2disc.
 
Back
Top